Dave Lyons writes: > I distinctly remember reading in Ben Forta book cfwack, that this issue was > brought up and he cleared said that it was a very good tag to use. > > if need be I will flip through and try to find the wording if necessary
If that is in fact Ben's opinion, he's entitled to it (just as we all are). He may have recommended it because it can arguably 'speed up' development...but I think the costs (not learning) are too high a price to pay for that small convenience. $0.02. Charlie > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Charlie Griefer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 10:46 AM > Subject: Re: CFFORM vs FORM > > >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Tony Weeg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 6:42 AM >> Subject: RE: CFFORM vs FORM >> >> >> > well, that makes sense for someone proficient in js :) >> > for those of us who arent, it really is a blessing. >> > >> > NOTICE TO ALL WHO ARE NOT HIGHLY PROFICIENT IN JS >> > CFMX AND CFFORM TAGS ARE OK !!!! >> >> I could not disagree with this statement more. >> >> For the record, I've not yet played with MX...but my comments speak to the >> usage of cfform in general. >> >> 1) You are a professional Web Developer (or some such title that implies > the >> same). If you're not proficient in js, learn it or risk falling behind > the >> curve. >> >> 2) cfform can only do so much. Can you compare two field values to see if >> they're equal? Can you say, 'if this field has a value then this field >> cannot'? Can you do anything past the basic validation? By learning JS, >> you give yourself that ability. By relying on cfform, you are very > limited >> in what you can do. >> >> 3) If you truly think having CF do the work for you (in generating its own >> JS) is 'a blessing'...you are very wrong. It's a curse because it coaxes >> you in to a false sense of security while others around you are moving >> forward with javascript and learning numerous other things that can be >> accomplished with js. you will always be limited to checking to see if a >> field is empty. or if it's numeric. ooooh. blessing. >> >> Not trying to come down on you. But since you stood on the soapbox and >> yelled to the world that it's 'OK' to be in this field (Web Development) > and >> not be profieient in JS...well, that's your opinion and you're entitled to >> it. My opinion is that if you don't know XHTML, XML, JavaScript, CSS, and >> at least one server side scripting language (CF, ASP, JSP, etc)...and are >> content to know less...then you're in for a rude awakening. >> >> Just my $0.02. >> >> Charlie >> >> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
