And this is why I never use it unless the "user" has their knickers in a wad
to know about the error before they go to the next page.  Even then I
usually don't bother (especially if they are on an intranet) because the
server validation is so quick they don't realize that they've just *gasp*
submitted the form and received clear, concise error messages without the
developer writing reams of JavaScript code (which users can - and will
disable) since I have to check it on the server anyway.  If they ask, I just
tell them that clicking the submit button triggers the validation code.
Well - it does :)

Now Flex is a whole 'nother can of worms and many times I validate the
second the user changes the value or focus.

Dawn

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Charlie Arehart <[email protected]>wrote:

>  Thanks for all that, and fair enough. I missed the looping that was
> appending more to the field name, but the info may still help someone.
>
>
>
> And indeed what you've confirmed is what I would have said if you'd stopped
> at your first paragraph: the onserver validation is causing CF to create the
> hidden field (albeit in a new format, different from the old style _date
> kind—check out the HTML source generated to see it), and that new hidden
> field name is still clearly causing CF to continue to do the conversion to
> odbc dateformat.
>
>
>
> I'll grant it's as annoying now as the old approach was then,  but at least
> what you tried confirmed things.
>
>
>
> You could raise the concern to Adobe to say, "hey, it's cool and all that
> your server-side validation (old or new approach) can validate dates, but
> why convert it also to odbc date format?"
>
>
>
> /charlie
>
>
>
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Ajas
> Mohammed
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 12, 2009 12:22 PM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [ACFUG Discuss] weird cfinput vs input stuff. date is shown
> as {d '2009-02-12'} vs 02/12/2009
>
>
>
> Hi Charlie,
>
>
> Thanks for pointing out _date validation. That would make sense. But if you
> notice, from the code, I use a loop and I am *appending* the index number
> variable #thisrow# to the end of the cfinput absence_date#this_row#. So
> technically, CF should not have done the _date validation as you
> mentioned     Ajas, what you're being tripped up by is the fact that
> you're using a suffix of  _date for your input field.
> My take is that, this is not the case.
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, manage your profile @
> http://www.acfug.org?fa=login.edituserform
>
> For more info, see http://www.acfug.org/mailinglists
> Archive @ http://www.mail-archive.com/discussion%40acfug.org/
> List hosted by FusionLink <http://www.fusionlink.com>
> -------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to