Comments on: Simple Safari Search Form Validation http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/simple_safari_search_form_validation The Weblog of Erik J. Barzeski Thu, 04 Dec 2008 01:40:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Erik http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/simple_safari_search_form_validation#comment-42823 Erik Mon, 20 Aug 2007 08:02:21 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/this_site_wont_validate/#comment-42823 why not use javascript to insert the type="search" and such...? This way you don't even have that ugly apple-proprietary-markup. Just my two cents... why not use javascript to insert the type="search" and such...?
This way you don't even have that ugly apple-proprietary-markup.
Just my two cents...

]]> By: Erik J. Barzeski http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/simple_safari_search_form_validation#comment-41705 Erik J. Barzeski Mon, 04 Jun 2007 13:17:42 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/this_site_wont_validate/#comment-41705 [quote comment="41695"]Wouldn't it also make sense to hide the submit button for webkit browsers, given that the search box is shown without one in the vast majority of cases?[/quote] It's not a live search box, though - you have to press enter. Without the button, I think some people might type and wonder why nothing's happening. Paul said on June 3, 2007:

Wouldn't it also make sense to hide the submit button for webkit browsers, given that the search box is shown without one in the vast majority of cases?

It's not a live search box, though - you have to press enter. Without the button, I think some people might type and wonder why nothing's happening.

]]> By: Paul http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/simple_safari_search_form_validation#comment-41695 Paul Sun, 03 Jun 2007 11:32:57 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/this_site_wont_validate/#comment-41695 Wouldn't it also make sense to hide the submit button for webkit browsers, given that the search box is shown without one in the vast majority of cases? Wouldn't it also make sense to hide the submit button for webkit browsers, given that the search box is shown without one in the vast majority of cases?

]]> By: Erik J. Barzeski http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/simple_safari_search_form_validation#comment-39662 Erik J. Barzeski Sat, 24 Feb 2007 20:45:12 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/this_site_wont_validate/#comment-39662 [quote comment="39659"]Interestingly, I note that you don't use the type="search" feature on your own search box![/quote] Yes I do. Obviously you'll need Safari (or OmniWeb) to see it. Richard Sheppard said on February 24, 2007:

Interestingly, I note that you don't use the type="search" feature on your own search box!

Yes I do. Obviously you'll need Safari (or OmniWeb) to see it.

]]> By: Richard Sheppard http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/simple_safari_search_form_validation#comment-39659 Richard Sheppard Sat, 24 Feb 2007 19:07:17 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/this_site_wont_validate/#comment-39659 Interestingly, I note that you don't use the type="search" feature on your own search box! Interestingly, I note that you don't use the type="search" feature on your own search box!

]]> By: Caius Durling http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/simple_safari_search_form_validation#comment-39527 Caius Durling Sat, 17 Feb 2007 12:13:55 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/this_site_wont_validate/#comment-39527 Just a quick heads up for people that don't know the difference between <? and <?php. Not all servers come with <? enabled, and indeed some hosts leave it disabled. <em>(I personally always leave it disabled on my test machine to make sure I write code that is useable on every php install.)</em> The problem comes when someone releases php code using <? and your server has it disabled. Then you have to go through and change all the short tags to the longer <?php type to get the code to run. The easy way round it is to just release all php code using the longer <?php, and indeed this is the recommendation from the default php.ini file: <blockquote cite="php.ini"><p>NOTE: Using short tags should be avoided when developing applications or libraries that are meant for redistribution, or deployment on PHP servers which are not under your control, because short tags may not be supported on the target server. For portable, redistributable code, be sure not to use short tags.</p></blockquote> Just a quick FYI for people that might not be able to get this running if (like me) php has short tags disabled! Just a quick heads up for people that don't know the difference between <? and <?php. Not all servers come with <? enabled, and indeed some hosts leave it disabled. (I personally always leave it disabled on my test machine to make sure I write code that is useable on every php install.)

The problem comes when someone releases php code using <? and your server has it disabled. Then you have to go through and change all the short tags to the longer <?php type to get the code to run.

The easy way round it is to just release all php code using the longer <?php, and indeed this is the recommendation from the default php.ini file:

Caius Durling said on February 17, 2007:

NOTE: Using short tags should be avoided when developing applications or
libraries that are meant for redistribution, or deployment on PHP
servers which are not under your control, because short tags may not
be supported on the target server. For portable, redistributable code,
be sure not to use short tags.

Just a quick FYI for people that might not be able to get this running if (like me) php has short tags disabled!

]]> By: input type="search" - Random Genius http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/simple_safari_search_form_validation#comment-29182 input type="search" - Random Genius Sun, 10 Dec 2006 16:27:49 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/this_site_wont_validate/#comment-29182 [...] Erik J. Barzeski over at NSLog goes into it in more depth (I didn't know about placeholder="" for example) and he also goes into a way to only present it to Safari & Omniweb. Link Just because I use safari and its so cool! "They figure it has no type, so they use type="text" instead " If you do, just set the unique identifier to the same each time. [...] [...] Erik J. Barzeski over at NSLog goes into it in more depth (I didn't know about placeholder="" for example) and he also goes into a way to only present it to Safari & Omniweb. Link Just because I use safari and its so cool! "They figure it has no type, so they use type="text" instead " If you do, just set the unique identifier to the same each time. [...]

]]> By: Erik J. Barzeski http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/simple_safari_search_form_validation#comment-21865 Erik J. Barzeski Wed, 08 Nov 2006 18:37:15 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/this_site_wont_validate/#comment-21865 [quote comment="21818"]Sorry monsieur, but that's really inelegant and kludgy. You might want to look at custom DTDs -- google it or read <a href="http://alistapart.com/articles/customdtd/">the article at A List Apart</a>.[/quote] Thanks for the pointer. I modified the page to incorporate the following addition to the DOCTYPE: <code><[ <!ATTLIST input type CDATA #IMPLIED> <!ATTLIST input placeholder CDATA #IMPLIED> <!ATTLIST input autosave CDATA #IMPLIED> <!ATTLIST input results CDATA #IMPLIED> ]></code> That worked but, as the article noted, the "]>" characters displayed themselves. I attempted to create my own DTD and didn't succeed. So, inelegant and kludgy as it is, my method remains. It's not for validation, per se, but more to reveal features to Safari/OmniWeb users. Hendrik said on November 8, 2006:

Sorry monsieur, but that's really inelegant and kludgy. You might want to look at custom DTDs -- google it or read the article at A List Apart.

Thanks for the pointer. I modified the page to incorporate the following addition to the DOCTYPE:

<[
<!ATTLIST input type CDATA #IMPLIED>
<!ATTLIST input placeholder CDATA #IMPLIED>
<!ATTLIST input autosave CDATA #IMPLIED>
<!ATTLIST input results CDATA #IMPLIED>
]>

That worked but, as the article noted, the "]>" characters displayed themselves. I attempted to create my own DTD and didn't succeed. So, inelegant and kludgy as it is, my method remains. It's not for validation, per se, but more to reveal features to Safari/OmniWeb users.

]]> By: Hendrik http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/simple_safari_search_form_validation#comment-21818 Hendrik Wed, 08 Nov 2006 12:22:44 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/this_site_wont_validate/#comment-21818 Sorry monsieur, but that's really inelegant and kludgy. You might want to look at custom DTDs -- google it or read <a href="http://alistapart.com/articles/customdtd/">the article at A List Apart</a>. Sorry monsieur, but that's really inelegant and kludgy. You might want to look at custom DTDs -- google it or read the article at A List Apart.

]]> By: Erik J. Barzeski http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/simple_safari_search_form_validation#comment-21611 Erik J. Barzeski Tue, 07 Nov 2006 18:03:04 +0000 http://nslog.com/2006/11/06/this_site_wont_validate/#comment-21611 [quote comment="21338"]Already told you, but just so I don't look like a complete ass to other people: I suggested "stripos" *because* it was case insensitive, and I just messed up when trying to say that. As you said though, it's probably cheaper to downcase and do a case sensitive comparison, and thus "strpos" works.[/quote] Plus, I just noticed, <code>stripos</code> <a href="http://us3.php.net/stripos">requires PHP 5</a>. Jesper said on November 6, 2006:

Already told you, but just so I don't look like a complete ass to other people: I suggested "stripos" *because* it was case insensitive, and I just messed up when trying to say that. As you said though, it's probably cheaper to downcase and do a case sensitive comparison, and thus "strpos" works.

Plus, I just noticed, stripos requires PHP 5.

]]>