Hello and welcome to our community! Is this your first visit?
Register
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    New to the CF scene
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    cleveland, OH
    Posts
    9
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Question java script enabled browser

    Is there an easy way to tell if a person visiting your site has script (java scipt in particular enabled)????? Thanks

  • #2
    Senior Coder joh6nn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    72 W. 48' 57" , 41 N. 32' 04"
    Posts
    1,887
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    well, in order to do what? trying to use javascript, to find out if javascript is turned off, in order to do something with javascript, obviously isn't going to work. are you looking for this as a value in a form submission? what is it that you're looking to do?
    bluemood | devedge | devmo | MS Dev Library | WebMonkey | the Guide

    i am a loser geek, crazy with an evil streak,
    yes i do believe there is a violent thing inside of me.

  • #3
    New to the CF scene
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    cleveland, OH
    Posts
    9
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I have a page that is password protected with a java script but if java script is disabled than it passes right over the password check. I know this is not the tightest security but it is really all i need for now.

  • #4
    Senior Coder joh6nn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    72 W. 48' 57" , 41 N. 32' 04"
    Posts
    1,887
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    well, i don't think there's anything that's gonna help you in this case. there are <noscript> tags, and everything inside of them, is only shown if the user hasn't got javascript ( or hasn't got it turned on ), but i don't see how that's gonna do you any good.

    sorry.
    bluemood | devedge | devmo | MS Dev Library | WebMonkey | the Guide

    i am a loser geek, crazy with an evil streak,
    yes i do believe there is a violent thing inside of me.

  • #5
    Regular Coder
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    TEXAS . . . 'nuf said
    Posts
    468
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Well, my skewed logic is this....

    If they have JS disabled, they can reach your "protected" page as long as they know the exact URL. But if they know the exact URL, then they must have originally had the password. That, or they were given the exact URL ... and they could have been given the actual password just the same.

    Basically, don't worry about it. The JS protection I use on a couple of my sites makes the protected page (not an entire site) something like 7394810293841893844.htm. So, I'm not too worried about anyone guessing it! And if they do...power to them.
    Gordo
    "In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."
    - Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968)

  • #6
    Senior Coder joh6nn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    72 W. 48' 57" , 41 N. 32' 04"
    Posts
    1,887
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    something just occurred to me:

    <HTML>
    <HEAD>
    <NOSCRIPT>
    <TITLE>Uh-oh, No JavaScript...</TITLE>
    <META HTTP-EQUIV="refresh" content="10; URL=http://www.yoursite.com/pageForNoJS.htm">
    </NOSCRIPT>
    <TITLE>Please enter password</TITLE>
    </HEAD>

    that'd be a redirect after 10 seconds ( you can change the number of seconds ), for people who don't have javascript. it should work in most browsers.
    bluemood | devedge | devmo | MS Dev Library | WebMonkey | the Guide

    i am a loser geek, crazy with an evil streak,
    yes i do believe there is a violent thing inside of me.

  • #7
    Regular Coder
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    self.location
    Posts
    181
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    it does work - I use it all the time. But note that it doesn't validate: W3C doesn't like having meta tags nested like that...

  • #8
    New to the CF scene
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    cleveland, OH
    Posts
    9
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    thank you very much i think that will work for now.

  • #9
    New to the CF scene
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    cleveland, OH
    Posts
    9
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    dumb question - what is wc3

  • #10
    Regular Coder
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    self.location
    Posts
    181
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    not a dumb question - just a newbie question...

    ... a/k/a the World Wide Web Consortium, whose mission is to develop, recommend and establish universal standards for the web.

    http://www.w3.org/

    Note that there is a difference between a standards body, which is prescriptive, and a totalitarian dictatorship, which is proscriptive - a distinction often ignored by its adherents and proselytizers.

  • #11
    Senior Coder joh6nn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    72 W. 48' 57" , 41 N. 32' 04"
    Posts
    1,887
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    realisis, i'd love to tell you what i think the w3c can do with about 70% of their standards, but this is a mixed community, and we have rules about that kind of language. i personally don't care at all if my pages have the right doctype, if they validates, or if they use the "wonderful" new dom. i just want my pages to work.

    ::shrug::

    just my opinion
    bluemood | devedge | devmo | MS Dev Library | WebMonkey | the Guide

    i am a loser geek, crazy with an evil streak,
    yes i do believe there is a violent thing inside of me.

  • #12
    Supreme Overlord Spookster's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Marion, IA USA
    Posts
    6,273
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 83 Times in 82 Posts
    Well not trying to argue but without the W3C NS and Microsoft would have continued down their seperate paths as they were years ago and we would end up having to make completely seperate sites for each browser. Those standards and guidelines give the browser engineers something to go by and to prevent web developers from having nervous breakdowns.

    Kind of like having rules of the road. Without them the roads would be chaos.
    Spookster
    CodingForums Supreme Overlord
    All Hail Spookster

  • #13
    Senior Coder
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    41 8' 52" N -95 53' 31" W
    Posts
    3,660
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I'm with you, Spookster. I'm actually starting to see more things working cross-browser, and I hope it's a trend that continues. And personally, I LIKE XHTML much more than being able to just code sloppy stuff - the old ways have spawned a whole lot of garbage code (and pages).

    And ASP.NET (yeah, a $MS tech, but I'm already seeing job postings for people with .NET experience!) makes heavy use of XML from what I understand as well - probably why my first class next month is called "Developing XML Web Services".
    Former ASP Forum Moderator - I'm back!

    If you can teach yourself how to learn, you can learn anything. ;)

  • #14
    New Coder
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    28
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I'm kinda with Spookster except for a couple of things:

    * the W3C's website is possibly the most bureaucratic mess I've ever seen - and this is from someone who spent 13+ years in the bureaucracy and speaks fluent bureaucratese. They really have taken the definition of a camel being a horse designed by a committee to its (in)finite conclusion.

    * I also suspect those kind, public-spirited and caring souls that make up the W3C (aka in some circles as "the Borg") really don't like people to design websites that have pictures or attractive layouts.

    * Another suspicion is that they don't like making websites to be so easy that "just anyone" can do it. Why else attempt to remove tags that were logical and sensible such as "font", "center", etc?

    Sorry, I know it's all more complex than that, but then again try and make sense reading the BS on www.w3c.org.

    Having said that, I do agree with standards and the need for the browsers from the various companies to at least meet them.

    Neil


  •  

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •