Re: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible![ENCRYPTED]
I applied the changes I outlined below sometime last week, but forgot to mention it here. Let me know if there is anything else that I could/should add to the CFCs. Cheers G On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 10:49:31 -0700, Deanna Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Woops, sorry, I didn't mean to have id in the label. I meant that to be > title (like you were doing). ID shouldn't be in the label - just the input. > > - Original Message - > From: "Greg Stewart" > > > And I still get it wrong... :) I just checked with the > > webstandards.org website and they recommend: > > > > > > > > maxlength="" size="" name="txtFirstName" id="txtFirstName" value=""> > > > > I'll settle for that unless there is a compelling argument for adding > > the ID attribute as well. > > I'll fix that up tomorrow some time, but thanks for the feedback! > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible![ENCRYPTED]
Woops, sorry, I didn't mean to have id in the label. I meant that to be title (like you were doing). ID shouldn't be in the label - just the input. - Original Message - From: "Greg Stewart" > And I still get it wrong... :) I just checked with the > webstandards.org website and they recommend: > > > > maxlength="" size="" name="txtFirstName" id="txtFirstName" value=""> > > I'll settle for that unless there is a compelling argument for adding > the ID attribute as well. > I'll fix that up tomorrow some time, but thanks for the feedback! [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible!
Woops, sorry, I didn't mean to have id in the label. I meant that to be title (like you were doing). ID shouldn't be in the label - just the input. - Original Message - From: "Greg Stewart" > And I still get it wrong... :) I just checked with the > webstandards.org website and they recommend: > > > > maxlength="" size="" name="txtFirstName" id="txtFirstName" value=""> > > I'll settle for that unless there is a compelling argument for adding > the ID attribute as well. > I'll fix that up tomorrow some time, but thanks for the feedback! [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
RE: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible!
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 16:31 | > Just curious, what's the big advantage of XHTML compatible? | You can perform XSLT on xhtml pages... which according to the | XSLT cookbook (O'Reilly) for more details on how this is | going to be very handy in the future | | Some examples off the top of my head | - XSL template to change specific XHTML elements | - Prefilling XHTML forms without server side intervention | - Will make future programming tasks easier To add -- forces full separation of presentation/content (i.e. css and xhtml). ### This message has been scanned by F-Secure Anti-Virus for Microsoft Exchange. For more information, connect to http://www.F-Secure.com/ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible!
And I still get it wrong... :) I just checked with the webstandards.org website and they recommend: maxlength="" size="" name="txtFirstName" id="txtFirstName" value=""> I'll settle for that unless there is a compelling argument for adding the ID attribute as well. I'll fix that up tomorrow some time, but thanks for the feedback! Cheers G On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 10:08:27 -0500, Deanna Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, I looked at your code and I have some questions/comments (nifty concept, > though) > > 1. Why do use spans instead of just classing the elements? > 2. You're using the label tag improperly, if you want to use it to associate > the label with the element. Either the form element has to be nested in the > label tag: > Your Name: > > > > OR you have to use the "for" attribute combined with the "id attribute: > Your Name: > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Greg Stewart" > Subject: Re: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible! > > > I pesonally have never used the CFFORM tags, but the xHTML directive > > is one of the reason's I have built up a form CFC so that I can cut > > down a little on my form building and amke sure I don't forget any of > > the attributes for xHTML/accessible forms... You can find them here: > > http://gregs.tcias.co.uk/cold_fusion/two_cfcs_released.php > > > > I'd really appreciate any kind of feedback... > > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
RE: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible!
Or the onTap framework which has some extensive forms features, some of which overlap what's available with qForms but provide integrated server-side components which a purely _javascript_ API like qForms can't provide. In particular the onTap framework's form library allows you to specify a label for the validation on a given form field as another html element on the page - if the content of that element changes, so does all the validation, both client-side and server-side. It's similarly easy to make client-side validation and server-side validation use the same display for errors, either having all errors display in a js alert (icky) or having all errors display within the context of the page. > I think the simplest, quickest and dirtiest solution would > be to write a tag which you wrap round all calls to > CFFORM, then use the tag to parse > thistag.generatedcontent, lowercasing this, and end > tagging that - should be fairly simple to write... > Global search and replace " > " > And "" with "" > So, now you have a quick frix if you need to be xmtml in a > hurry (i.e. if/when the directive comes down), and if you > have time you can look into qForms, or hang around waiting > for Blackstone. > Cheers > Bert s. isaac dealey 954.927.5117 new epoch : isn't it time for a change? add features without fixtures with the onTap open source framework http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=44477&DE=1 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
RE: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible!
I think the simplest, quickest and dirtiest solution would be to write a tag which you wrap round all calls to CFFORM, then use the tag to parse thistag.generatedcontent, lowercasing this, and end tagging that - should be fairly simple to write... Global search and replace " And "" with "" So, now you have a quick frix if you need to be xmtml in a hurry (i.e. if/when the directive comes down), and if you have time you can look into qForms, or hang around waiting for Blackstone. Cheers Bert From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 14 July 2004 15:27 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible! > I was just trying to make some of my pages xhtml 1.0 > transitional compatible and when I tested through the W3C > testing page I noticed that cfform and the others capitalize > the tags and don't self close them. > > Anyone else notice this? > > I would hate to have to recode all of my pages when the > directive comes down to be xhtml compatible (I know it's > coming just don't know when). Yes, this is a known issue with the current version of CFMX. However, based on what has been demonstrated about Blackstone at user groups, I strongly suspect this will be resolved (and then some) in the upcoming version of CF. Beyond that, though, I'd recommend that you use something like qForms, or build your own form validation mechanism, rather than using CFFORM. While it's very easy to use CFFORM, it's a bit harder to customize it to your liking. I strongly recommend you look at qForms. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible!
So, I looked at your code and I have some questions/comments (nifty concept, though) 1. Why do use spans instead of just classing the elements? 2. You're using the label tag improperly, if you want to use it to associate the label with the element. Either the form element has to be nested in the label tag: Your Name: OR you have to use the "for" attribute combined with the "id attribute: Your Name: - Original Message - From: "Greg Stewart" Subject: Re: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible! > I pesonally have never used the CFFORM tags, but the xHTML directive > is one of the reason's I have built up a form CFC so that I can cut > down a little on my form building and amke sure I don't forget any of > the attributes for xHTML/accessible forms... You can find them here: > http://gregs.tcias.co.uk/cold_fusion/two_cfcs_released.php > > I'd really appreciate any kind of feedback... > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
RE: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible!
> Ok, I have to say that I agree with not using the cfform, > cfinput, etc. but I have a lot of legacy code. Some I wrote > when I was just starting with cf and a lot of it that I > inherited. I suspect that this code isn't XHTML-compliant anyway, though, right? I know the "legacy code" I've left laying around hasn't always been XHTML-compliant. > > My issue is that a couple of hours of work on Macromedias > part to fix the tags (the released a hot fix for the form > tags a while ago and could have done it then) could save > hundreds to thousands of hours of work for their customers > who may need to make the switch but not be able to get > Blackstone. > > One of my pet peeves is when people say "oh just wait a > little while and it will be fixed in the next version" in > this case "Blackstone". There is no guarantee that I will > get budget approval for Blackstone and I'm sure that other > Macromedia customers are in the same boat. Or the other > issue that can happen (and it did to me with mx and mx 6.1) > is that the IT decision makers probably won't make Blackstone > a company standard for a while and we can't install it on our > production servers until they do, so fixes in a new version > can't help the problem now. > Perhaps, as a paying Macromedia customer, you should complain to them directly. I sympathize with you, but I can't solve the problem, beyond noting that there is an encrypted file named "form.cfm" in my \WEB-INF\cftags directory. However, realistically, how soon will XHTML be important to you? I don't know if it'll be important in a general sense during the lifespan of the Blackstone release. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
RE: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible!
Dave, Ok, I have to say that I agree with not using the cfform, cfinput, etc. but I have a lot of legacy code. Some I wrote when I was just starting with cf and a lot of it that I inherited. We also have some programmers in our group who still aren't _javascript_ proficient yet. I personally write all of my own js for validation now. My issue is that a couple of hours of work on Macromedias part to fix the tags (the released a hot fix for the form tags a while ago and could have done it then) could save hundreds to thousands of hours of work for their customers who may need to make the switch but not be able to get Blackstone. One of my pet peeves is when people say "oh just wait a little while and it will be fixed in the next version" in this case "Blackstone". There is no guarantee that I will get budget approval for Blackstone and I'm sure that other Macromedia customers are in the same boat. Or the other issue that can happen (and it did to me with mx and mx 6.1) is that the IT decision makers probably won't make Blackstone a company standard for a while and we can't install it on our production servers until they do, so fixes in a new version can't help the problem now. Sorry for the rant, but I had to get it out. Steve -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 10:27 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible! > I was just trying to make some of my pages xhtml 1.0 > transitional compatible and when I tested through the W3C > testing page I noticed that cfform and the others capitalize > the tags and don't self close them. > > Anyone else notice this? > > I would hate to have to recode all of my pages when the > directive comes down to be xhtml compatible (I know it's > coming just don't know when). Yes, this is a known issue with the current version of CFMX. However, based on what has been demonstrated about Blackstone at user groups, I strongly suspect this will be resolved (and then some) in the upcoming version of CF. Beyond that, though, I'd recommend that you use something like qForms, or build your own form validation mechanism, rather than using CFFORM. While it's very easy to use CFFORM, it's a bit harder to customize it to your liking. I strongly recommend you look at qForms. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
RE: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible!
> > Just curious, what's the big advantage of XHTML compatible? > > You can perform XSLT on xhtml pages... which according to the > XSLT cookbook (O'Reilly) for more details on how this is > going to be very handy in the future > > Some examples off the top of my head > - XSL template to change specific XHTML elements > - Prefilling XHTML forms without server side intervention > - Will make future programming tasks easier Of course, if you're using server-side processing, these things aren't especially useful, I suspect. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
RE: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible!
> Just curious, what's the big advantage of XHTML compatible? You can perform XSLT on xhtml pages... which according to the XSLT cookbook (O'Reilly) for more details on how this is going to be very handy in the future Some examples off the top of my head - XSL template to change specific XHTML elements - Prefilling XHTML forms without server side intervention - Will make future programming tasks easier Can't do any of it myself yet, but trying though ;-) -- David Collie [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
RE: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible!
> I was just trying to make some of my pages xhtml 1.0 > transitional compatible and when I tested through the W3C > testing page I noticed that cfform and the others capitalize > the tags and don't self close them. > > Anyone else notice this? > > I would hate to have to recode all of my pages when the > directive comes down to be xhtml compatible (I know it's > coming just don't know when). Yes, this is a known issue with the current version of CFMX. However, based on what has been demonstrated about Blackstone at user groups, I strongly suspect this will be resolved (and then some) in the upcoming version of CF. Beyond that, though, I'd recommend that you use something like qForms, or build your own form validation mechanism, rather than using CFFORM. While it's very easy to use CFFORM, it's a bit harder to customize it to your liking. I strongly recommend you look at qForms. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
RE: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible!
> Just curious, what's the big advantage of XHTML compatible? That's a good question, I think. Right now, the advantage is minimal if not completely illusory. There aren't any devices out there which take advantage of XHTML specifically, to my knowledge. So, in current browsers, XHTML is functionally identical to HTML for most of us. However, in the future, I expect that XHTML will be very widely supported by all sorts of browsing devices. Because XHTML is an XML language, it can be parsed by any XML parser. XML parsers are a lot smaller (and stricter) than HTML parsers, which typically have all sorts of error handling for malformed HTML. So, XHTML documents can conceivably be used by many devices other than desktop browsers. In addition, it's a lot easier to ensure that your documents aren't malformed or invalid with any XML language, compared to HTML. So, rather than rewriting everything in XHTML later, it makes a lot of sense to use XHTML now, since it works with today's browsers. It's kind of tedious and painful to rewrite existing HTML as XHTML, but it's easy to write new XHTML. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible!
>>I would hate to have to recode all of my pages when the directive comes down >>to be xhtml compatible Just curious, what's the big advantage of XHTML compatible? -- ___ REUSE CODE! Use custom tags; See http://www.contentbox.com/claude/customtags/tagstore.cfm (Please send any spam to this address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Thanks. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible!
I pesonally have never used the CFFORM tags, but the xHTML directive is one of the reason's I have built up a form CFC so that I can cut down a little on my form building and amke sure I don't forget any of the attributes for xHTML/accessible forms... You can find them here: http://gregs.tcias.co.uk/cold_fusion/two_cfcs_released.php I'd really appreciate any kind of feedback... Cheers G On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 08:28:57 -0400, DURETTE, STEVEN J (AIT) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I was just trying to make some of my pages xhtml 1.0 transitional compatible > and when I tested through the W3C testing page I noticed that cfform and the > others capitalize the tags and don't self close them. > > Anyone else notice this? > > I would hate to have to recode all of my pages when the directive comes down > to be xhtml compatible (I know it's coming just don't know when). > > Steve > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
CFForm, CFInput, etc not xhtml compatible!
Hi all, I was just trying to make some of my pages xhtml 1.0 transitional compatible and when I tested through the W3C testing page I noticed that cfform and the others capitalize the tags and don't self close them. Anyone else notice this? I would hate to have to recode all of my pages when the directive comes down to be xhtml compatible (I know it's coming just don't know when). Steve [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: Not XHTML
~sends you to the feedback page on the MM site~ http://www.macromedia.com/bin/webfeedback.cgi Tell them not us. Stephen CF-Europe 2003 May 29-30th 2003 Olympia Conference Centre London http://www.cf-europe.org/ - Original Message - From: "Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 12:01 PM Subject: Not XHTML > http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=www.macromedia.com > > > > > > > -Original Message- > From: Ryan Sabir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 05 March 2003 11:32 > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: New Macromedia.com launched! > > > I went into the accessibility section, and turned on the HTML version which > is much faster and therefore more useful for my main need for the site, > which is looking up support and product information... you don't have to > twiddle your thumbs for 10 seconds every time you go back to the home page. > > I had the top toolbar problem as well, i logged a bug report and got a > message back saying I needed to upgrade my Flash player.. after doing that > it worked ok.. a bit annoying, I would have thought I'd be warned that my > player needed updating... > > > - Original Message - > From: "Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 10:06 PM > Subject: RE: New Macromedia.com launched! > > > > I like the new design, but it still suffers from the old back button > problem > > which is a real usability issue; I preferred the old site : much cleaner. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Andre Mohamed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 05 March 2003 10:59 > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: RE: New Macromedia.com launched! > > > > > > Pity the top toolbar on the home page doesn't work how it's supposed to > > :) > > > > Other than that, looks great. I wouldn't like to load it over a modem > > though! > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Oliver Cookson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 05 March 2003 09:45 > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: New Macromedia.com launched! > > > > Maybe there has already been a post, if not there is now! :) > > > > The new Macromedia.com has been launched and its looks excellent (if a > > little slow in places). > > > > Well done MM. > > > > > > > > > > ~| 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 Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Not XHTML
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=www.macromedia.com -Original Message- From: Ryan Sabir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 05 March 2003 11:32 To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: New Macromedia.com launched! I went into the accessibility section, and turned on the HTML version which is much faster and therefore more useful for my main need for the site, which is looking up support and product information... you don't have to twiddle your thumbs for 10 seconds every time you go back to the home page. I had the top toolbar problem as well, i logged a bug report and got a message back saying I needed to upgrade my Flash player.. after doing that it worked ok.. a bit annoying, I would have thought I'd be warned that my player needed updating... - Original Message - From: "Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 10:06 PM Subject: RE: New Macromedia.com launched! > I like the new design, but it still suffers from the old back button problem > which is a real usability issue; I preferred the old site : much cleaner. > > -Original Message- > From: Andre Mohamed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 05 March 2003 10:59 > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: New Macromedia.com launched! > > > Pity the top toolbar on the home page doesn't work how it's supposed to > :) > > Other than that, looks great. I wouldn't like to load it over a modem > though! > > -Original Message- > From: Oliver Cookson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 05 March 2003 09:45 > To: CF-Talk > Subject: New Macromedia.com launched! > > Maybe there has already been a post, if not there is now! :) > > The new Macromedia.com has been launched and its looks excellent (if a > little slow in places). > > Well done MM. > > > > ~| 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 Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
