On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, Manuel Lemos wrote:
> I would say that the long standing users are even more aware that they
> should not turn off Javascript because they are experienced enough to
> know that some sites of their preference do not work right without
> Javascript.
>
> I believe that users
On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, Analysis & Solutions wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 10:36:56PM -0500, Miguel Cruz wrote:
>> If you're doing the site for the US government, you're (thank goodness)
>> required by law to make sure it works without JavaScript.
>
> REALLY?! That's good news. Could you pleas
Hello,
On 06/14/2002 01:25 AM, Analysis & Solutions wrote:
Javascript-less represent less then 0.5% of the users in the World.
>>>
>>>I'd be interested in seeing this data proven. I'm not being sarcastic --
>>>I'm genuinely interested.
>>
>>http://www.phpclasses.org/browse.html/statistics/st
Hello,
On 06/14/2002 01:08 AM, Justin French wrote:
>>http://www.phpclasses.org/browse.html/statistics/statistics.html#user-browsers
>
>
> Interesting, but these stats only indicate what *browser* has been used...
> not if JS was enabled/disabled.
>
> case 1: user gets sick of pop-ups and crap
Sire:
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 02:56:27PM +1000, Martin Towell wrote:
>
> I agree that any checks should be done on the server anyway, just in case
> someone has js turned off. But to reduce the load on the server, you can use
> js to at least filter _some_ of the traffic.
You have a point. Tho
Spam Bots/E-mail Addys
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 12:32:05AM -0300, Manuel Lemos wrote:
> On 06/14/2002 12:03 AM, Justin French wrote:
> >On 14/06/02 12:45 PM, Manuel Lemos ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> >>Javascript-less represent less then 0.5% of the users in the World.
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 10:36:56PM -0500, Miguel Cruz wrote:
>
> If you're doing the site for the US government, you're (thank goodness)
> required by law to make sure it works without JavaScript.
REALLY?! That's good news. Could you please provide a source for that?
Thanks,
--Dan
--
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 12:32:05AM -0300, Manuel Lemos wrote:
> On 06/14/2002 12:03 AM, Justin French wrote:
> >On 14/06/02 12:45 PM, Manuel Lemos ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> >>Javascript-less represent less then 0.5% of the users in the World.
> >
> >I'd be interested in seeing this data pro
on 14/06/02 1:32 PM, Manuel Lemos ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> http://www.phpclasses.org/browse.html/statistics/statistics.html#user-browsers
Interesting, but these stats only indicate what *browser* has been used...
not if JS was enabled/disabled.
case 1: user gets sick of pop-ups and crap, t
On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, Justin French wrote:
> on 14/06/02 12:45 PM, Manuel Lemos ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> I prefer to leave the less-than-0-dot-5-percent-non-Javascript-browser
>> users fixing the address that had @ replaced.
>
> I agree. And in the case of a user site like yours, and email f
Hello,
On 06/14/2002 12:03 AM, Justin French wrote:
> on 14/06/02 12:45 PM, Manuel Lemos ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
>
>>Javascript-less represent less then 0.5% of the users in the World.
>
>
> I'd be interested in seeing this data proven. I'm not being sarcastic --
> I'm genuinely interes
on 14/06/02 12:45 PM, Manuel Lemos ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Javascript-less represent less then 0.5% of the users in the World.
I'd be interested in seeing this data proven. I'm not being sarcastic --
I'm genuinely interested.
> You are guessing. I am sure your address leaked from some ot
Hello,
On 06/13/2002 11:02 PM, Justin French wrote:
>>>I don't think relying on JavaScript for something so integral as an email
>>>address it THAT good an idea...
>>
>>Why not? I use this on mirror sites that only serve static pages so I do
>>not need to depend on PHP.
>
>
> Simply, if the use
Hi,
on 14/06/02 11:53 AM, Manuel Lemos ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 06/13/2002 10:18 PM, Justin French wrote:
>> I don't think relying on JavaScript for something so integral as an email
>> address it THAT good an idea...
>
> Why not? I use this on mirror sites that only serve s
Hello,
On 06/13/2002 10:18 PM, Justin French wrote:
> I don't think relying on JavaScript for something so integral as an email
> address it THAT good an idea...
Why not? I use this on mirror sites that only serve static pages so I do
not need to depend on PHP.
> Use php to send a mailto: he
I don't think relying on JavaScript for something so integral as an email
address it THAT good an idea...
Use php to send a mailto: header! I have a mail.php file, which I call with
a link like:
Justin
and mail.php is a simple file:
mailto:$email_address";);
?>
It's got a default domain and
Hello,
On 06/13/2002 02:10 PM, Jason Soza wrote:
> Just curious...
>
> If I have a site that stores information about people in a database,
> including e-mail addresses, and that information is only viewable when
> called via a user-specific variable, i.e. their alias, can spambots
> still ha
17 matches
Mail list logo
