Re: [WSG] Encoded mailto links

2007-10-18 Thread Jason Friesen
I've followed the technique below; I find it much simpler to follow  
these techniques (and change the fieldnames occasionally), than try  
to get accurate spam filtering at the server level.  We actually  
hired a company, spamstop.ca, to filter our results for our College.   
It's better, but still a case of I'm getting too much spam! and  
then I didn't get that email!


For other email addresses (or projects), I've used Hiveware Enkoder  
( http://hivelogic.com/enkoder ) and that seemed to work, with  
noscript pointing to a form or textual description of the email  
address.  Seems to help...





Ray Leventhal wrote:
As a matter of preference, I generally try to eliminate all mailto:
links on any site I've been asked to work on.  In place, I use a  
contact

form,


Anders Nawroth wrote:

Me too :-)

But then you get form-post spam after a while ...


To minimize form-post spam, I've taken to employing a technique I
learned early on in my phpBB admin days.  It amounts to including a
field which is extra and which must remain empty for any process  
action

to take place.

Visible text informing the *human* user to leave the field blank or  
risk
their post not reaching the destination is placed clearly near the  
field.


The processing script is instructed to simply ignore the form if the
'extra' field has anything in it.  In php, I do this with a  
combination

of trim and strlen on the $_POST['fieldname'] value.

Naming the form field attribute something interesting like
'email_address_confirm' makes this more effective.




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] Catch 22 list problem

2007-10-14 Thread Jason Friesen
That's pretty much what we did; usually hx and p, with ul where  
appropriate.  But I still look longingly at the counters in CSS, and  
grimace everytime someone says, But we have to add in another point  
between 2 and 3...



On 2007-Oct-14, at 14:10 , [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Certainly for this example, the use of an ordered list is incorrect  
- there is a strong hint there in the description; this should be  
marked up with p tags, with the identifier as the first bit of  
text, ie the number is content in this example.
If you think about it, the 'label' of each item MUST remain the  
same, regardless of how much or little of the document is quoted,  
and more to the point adding or removing content MUST NOT alter the  
numbering. This is the exact opposite of what an OL is intended to do.


Mike





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***