Ford, Mike [LSS] wrote...
>> <a href="http://coremessaging.com/";
>> onClick="document.the_form.foo.value='5';
>> document.the_form.submit();">Next</a>
>
> ... but there's *still* no GET variables involved here...
I'm weighing the pros and cons of two different methods: "Invisible GET"
and POST. That email described the invisible form + JavaScript POST method.
> But why don't you want to just use POST? If POST gets the information to your
> script without exposing it in the URL, why are you insisting on using a method
> that puts it in the URL, and then jumping through hoops to hide it because you
> didn't really want to put there in the first place? In fact, why are you so
> desparately trying to avoid using something that so obviously does exactly
> what you want to do??
Two reasons:
- Invisible GET doesn't require JavaScript. I'm unsure whether it's
considered fine for a mainstream site to require (not just "be
cooler with") JavaScript.
- Invisible GET makes for much shorter web pages, since everything you
can click on requires its own invisible form storage somewhere, plus
JavaScript code. For example, a simple calendar using POST needs (I
estimate) at least 5x the amount of data sent to the client.
-- Charles Wiltgen
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
