Prev: Disabling an extension on a perdir basis.
Next: How to handle a submitted form with no changes -- best practices sought
From: tedd on 11 Sep 2010 16:49 At 11:42 AM -0500 9/11/10, Tamara Temple wrote: >The debate on client-side vs. server-side form validation is >ongoing. Client-side is more responsive, and attempts to keep bad >data from ever reaching your application, but relies on javascript >being enabled. Since this is something easily turned off by users, >one can't always rely on it to do form validation. So server-side >validation is needed as well to allow your full application to >gracefully degrade in the absence of working javascript on the >client's side. Coding defensively helps! It's not a debate. You can provide progressive enhancement to your form to help your users *IF* you want. You should *always* validate all the information coming from the outside world. The question of *if* you want to do both is your choice without any debate. Those are only choices that you can elect to follow or not. Cheers, tedd -- ------- http://sperling.com/
From: tedd on 11 Sep 2010 16:51 At 1:09 PM -0400 9/11/10, Jason Pruim wrote: >Hey tedd, > >Thanks for the response but for this particular project I'm avoiding >using anything but standard HTML since it will be used almost >exclusively by people using screen readers and other assistive >technology so I'm going a little old school with it to make sure it >all works for everyone else first. That goes without saying. Regardless of *if* your users use screen readers, or not, progressive enhancement should be followed. Cheers, tedd -- ------- http://sperling.com/
From: Tamara Temple on 12 Sep 2010 03:30
On Sep 11, 2010, at 12:14 PM, Jason Pruim wrote: > On Sep 11, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Tamara Temple wrote: >> Rather than repeating all that code, I suggest the following: > [snip] > That's actually what I'm trying to get away from. I was hoping to do > it all in HEREDOC syntax. I've always thought it made it cleaner. > But that is a personal opinion :) Well, from a maintainability aspect, the way i showed makes more sense because if there are changes to be made (such as adding another option), you only have to make one change, not n changes. |