On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 10:43 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote: > >>>>> "JR" == Jim Rose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > JR> I'm missing something here. Why can't you just test to see if the > JR> variable is defined or not on your script? > > because he doesn't know in the code what the list of fields is. he needs > to either parse the html survey page or have some other file with that > list so he can validate them. he knows he can parse the html but he > doesn't want to do that (not sure why as it won't be hard). or he needs > to do some redesign where the fields are in a separate file (which the > validation code reads) and the html is templated or generated from that.
Sorry I'm coming in late and without reading the whole thread. But if it's his code generating the survey pages (presumably based directly on client input to a form or such), why can't he just have a single hidden field with all the field names generated? I've had code working on input generated from data in a database where the fields can change, and do that rather than go back to the database (we do that in debug mode for testing/validation). I've done similar things when pages are in development so the handling code doesn't need to make assumptions about what fields it should get. ??? OK, I suppose I should go read the thread. ;) -- Sean Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Boston-pm mailing list [email protected] http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
