Form Mailer

J

Joshua St. John

I am looking for cgi access so I can create my own form with whatever fields
I want and be able to use someones cgi access to send it. Please reply to
(e-mail address removed) Thanks

Joshua

--
____________________________________

Maybe God wants us to meet a few wrong
people before meeting the right one, so that
when we finally meet the person, we know
how grateful to be.
 
T

Tina - AffordableHOST.com

Why not use response-o-matic.com ??? Its free and very easy to use...been
around for years.

--Tina
 
P

Peter

What are you trying to send and where? You can get a form to submit the
fields to you in an email no problem. You can even specify the layout of the
body text using javascript. Depends on what you are trying to achieve.

Peter.
 
H

Hywel Jenkins

Peter said:
What are you trying to send and where?

What difference does that make? An email form is an email form,
unless you use action="mailto:..." (then it becomes a lottery).
You can get a form to submit the
fields to you in an email no problem. You can even specify the layout of the
body text using javascript. Depends on what you are trying to achieve.

Why would you use JavaScript to "specify the layout of the body text"?
 
P

Peter

Here's an example of what I am talking about. If you try this out, you will
find that the spaces have been altered to "+" signs. This is because when
you use the get method in the form, it encodes the form elements into the
url of the action. You could change the action to post and then change the
body text accordingly using javascript. This method gives a great deal of
control over the email that is being sent. I have made the to address
alterable in the form, but you could fix that to any address you like in the
action of the form and then remove the first table row. You will get a
security message shown stating you are about to submit an email, but I think
this is quite a nice way to send mail from a web page without having to
resort to cgi. Alternatively, you could check out Tripod or Angelfire as
they offer Perl cgi mailing scripts for free, just make your web page link
into their cgi script in the action and alter your form fields in accordance
with their instructions.

Hope that helps you understand what I was suggesting earlier.


Peter.

<!-- Put this in the head section of your html -->
<script type="text/javascript">
function submitForm() {
docment.myForm.submit();
}

function resetForm() {
document.myForm.reset();
}
</script>

<!-- Put this in the body section of your html -->
<form name="myForm" id="myForm" action="" method="get">
<table>
<tr>
<td>To</td>
<td><input type="text" name="to" value=""></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>CC</td>
<td><input type="text" name="cc" value=""></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>BCC</td>
<td><input type="text" name="bcc" value=""></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Subject</td>
<td><input type="text" name="subject" value=""></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Body</td>
<td><input type="text" name="body" value=""></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left"><input type="button" value="Clear" name="cmdReset"
onClick="resetForm();"></td>
<td align="right"><input type="button" value="Send" name="cmdSubmit"
onClick="submitForm();"></td>
</tr>
</table>
</form>
 
H

Hywel Jenkins

Here's an example of what I am talking about. If you try this out, you will
find that the spaces have been altered to "+" signs. This is because when
you use the get method in the form, it encodes the form elements into the
url of the action. You could change the action to post and then change the
body text accordingly using javascript. This method gives a great deal of
control over the email that is being sent. I have made the to address
alterable in the form, but you could fix that to any address you like in the
action of the form and then remove the first table row. You will get a
security message shown stating you are about to submit an email, but I think
this is quite a nice way to send mail from a web page without having to
resort to cgi. Alternatively, you could check out Tripod or Angelfire as
they offer Perl cgi mailing scripts for free, just make your web page link
into their cgi script in the action and alter your form fields in accordance
with their instructions.

Hope that helps you understand what I was suggesting earlier.
The code you've given has no effect on the layout of the email
whatsoever. It does nothing to format the data in any. In fact, you
just done a daft thing with buttons that already existing HTML (<input
type="submit"> and <input type="reset">).

You are so far off the mark you've almost shot yourself in the arse.
 
M

ManoDestra

I agree. The thing that annoyed me was that the guy wasn't even the guy who
asked the question. It pains me when people question you and act all smart
when they don't know what they're talking about. What goes around, comes
around, I suppose.

Probably just pissed off for being called Hywel. Get some web experience
before you open your mouth again Hywel. Try listening to people once in a
while and you might learn something.

Peter.
 
H

Hywel Jenkins

I agree. The thing that annoyed me was that the guy wasn't even the guy who
asked the question. It pains me when people question you and act all smart
when they don't know what they're talking about. What goes around, comes
around, I suppose.

Judging by the fact that your code sample did nothing of what you said
(manipulating email content), clearly you have no idea, either. Look at
the code you posted again: all it does is emulate the "reset" and
"submit" input types.
Probably just pissed off for being called Hywel.

Excellent come back. Very impressive. Particularly as you have no idea
how to reply to posts.
Get some web experience before you open your mouth again Hywel.

Now you've really got me laughing. I've been doing this for 7 years and
have a client list that includes three companies that turnover in excess
of £10,000,000 pa, as well as several other smaller companies (turnover
of circa £200,000 pa). In 1998 I developed a B2B ecommerce application
that handled in excess of £15,000,000 worth of transactions - that got
me an award from The Times for "Innovation in ECommerce".

If you really want a pissing contest to see who knows more about web
development, please feel free to post another one of your JavaScript
snippets.
 
H

Hywel Jenkins

My snippet of code as you call it didn't do much because it was only
illustrating a framework of how to do email without resorting to cgi.

All you need are various fields named to, cc, bcc, subject and body. Form
action="mailto:" method="get". Submit the form and it will send an email.

"mailto" as a form action doesn't work, regardless of what the RF says.
Did you read Iso's link? Here it is again:
http://www.isolani.co.uk/articles/mailto.html
Now can we please move on as I have better things to do with my time than
teach arrogant people like yourself the basics of HTTP/HTML.

Ever thought of a career in comedy? You certainly make me laugh. Your
"solution" had nothing to do with either HTTP or HTML. It was another
example of a hack employed by amateurs and newbies.
 
A

Art Sackett

In alt.html ManoDestra said:
My snippet of code as you call it didn't do much because it was only
illustrating a framework of how to do email without resorting to cgi.

And as such, it was illustrating a method that fails, quite often,
without giving notice to either the user or the intended recipient.
This leaves the user to assume that the intended recipient has chosen
to ignore his contact. This is clearly an unacceptable outcome.
Just because you have been in business for seven years does not necessarily
make a professional software engineer/web designer.

However, I am a professional software engineer and web designer, and
like Hywel, I think you're full of shit. You do not understand the
limitations of the "solution" you presented, and defend it as though it
is a perfectly suitable alternative to a server-side application. It is
not. Period.
Neither does it give you
the right to be self-righteous and downright offensive to someone who was
helping someone else in the first place.

It gives me that right, dipshit.
I trust you treat your customers in
a better fashion than you treat people who are trying to be helpful.

People who are so inexperienced that they are not even aware of the
fact that they're misleading others have no business trying to be
helpful. They ought to shut up and learn something first.
... my code which is perfectly
legit code and WORKS.

Works sometimes, fails without warning other times.

I hate it when people know far more than they ever bothered to learn.
It is basic form handling via an HTTP protocol we're
talking here. Surely you know about that?

No, that's not what it is.
Now can we please move on as I have better things to do with my time than
teach arrogant people like yourself the basics of HTTP/HTML.

Do you have the time to *learn* HTTP and HTML?
 
I

Isofarro

ManoDestra said:
Did I at any point claim that this was the best way to send email from a
web page? I did not. It has it's limitations, certainly. Particularly when
it comes to security, but this does not detract from the fact that you can
send an email from a web page without the need for any other server side
technology.

No you can't. Its too unreliable for use on the Web.

See http://www.isolani.co.uk/articles/mailto.html
 
I

Isofarro

ManoDestra said:
All you need are various fields named to, cc, bcc, subject and body. Form
action="mailto:"

Invalid HTML. Any use of a URL other than an HTTP URL is undefined and its
repercussions random.

But then so was your attack on my
code which is perfectly legit code and WORKS.

Invalid HTML is not "legit code" (sic). And it really doesn't work reliably
at all. There is absolutely no notification when it fails, and that makes
it impossible for you to determine that it actually does work. Or does
everyone who uses your broken form only use your computer to do so?
If you take
the time to listen to what is being said before slamming it into the
ground because it's not the way you do it, you may learn something of use.

Pot. Kettle. Black.
 
M

ManoDestra

There is no single solution for a problem when it comes to software
engineering. It depends on what your customers want, what they can afford,
the limitations of what hardware already exists in an organisation at any
one time, etc. I don't know why so many people can shit on something so
simple. Okay, it's not server side. That does not render my suggestion
useless. And it DOES work. I have never sent an email from an HTML form
client side that didn't work. And if it didn't work, it was because of the
network, or email client itself which shows as obvious because the email
either doesn't send or comes back with an error email stating that it could
not be sent. Not because of the HTML or anything related to how it was
coded.

I have been a software engineer for many years now and I take great
exception at being called a "newbie" (not that there's anything wrong with
being a "newbie", we all have to start somewhere after all). If you don't
like my solution, why not say "Okay, that's one way of doing it, but here's
another solution which is even better". It's called respect for other
people's knowledge and experience. Basic manners. I would say it is a
prerequisite for anyone who wishes to be termed PROFESSIONAL. Listen to
people, attack a problem from different angles. Find the best solution. You
might never solve a problem using a certain technique, but it doesn't hurt
to take some time to learn how the technique works and in what situations
that it COULD be implemented.

I shall not be posting any further responses in this newsgroup. I only
subscribed in order to deepen my own understanding, through listening to
other people's solutions and by helping others in turn.

I wish you all the very best of luck in your careers. With the attitudes I
have witnessed on this newsgroup, you will need it.

Best wishes
Peter.

P.S. I did read the article by the way. Very interesting, but not
conclusive. Still doesn't eradicate the possibility of sending an email
using the mailto protocol via a web page. Bye!
 
K

Kingdom

(e-mail address removed) (Art Sackett) wrote in
One last time...


So many people can "shit on something so simple" because it's wrong.


On the internet we cannot assume anything about the client's
abilities, but we *can* control the end of the transaction we're on,
the server side. It's a simple enough concept, I assume that as an
experienced software engineer you can grasp it.

mailto: only works sometimes. Other times, it fails. Surely, as an
experienced software engineer, you first researched the subject before
you opened your yap and started yammering away about it.

Now, let's just forget all of the technical reasons why mailto: is not
suitable for use outside of a rigidly controlled intranet, and just
attack your faulty logic:


You've never seen this thing fail, but when you have seen it fail...
you're talking out both sides of your ass! How can anyone trust a man
who'll contradict himself on either side of a single punctuation mark?


You are a newbie, fool. You're arguing with people who have many years
of experience in this and related fields, about a thing that we all
know perfectly well. A seasoned professional would know that he's
stepped out of his realm after receiving our response -- a newbie
would behave as you are.


Because we're not your underqualified night school instructors. You're
misleading another and are either too damned dumb to know it, or are
too proud to admit it. In either case, you are doing a disservice to
the community. It would be a further disservice to the community were
we all to say "that's one way of doing it". You deserve to be blasted,
and the other newbies deserve to see it so they'll know not to accept
your advice at face value.


Yeah, but you're full of crap anyway so no one cares how you define
professional, pseudopneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis, or
rhinoceros.


Heard that from one of your underqualified night school instructors,
didja?


That's probably a wise choice, at least in the short term.


Listening, and even discussing, are perfectly acceptable things to do
here. Misleading people is not. First learn, then teach -- that's how
it works.

There are a lot of posers in the world, and a disproportionate number
of them sit in front of computers. I feel no compulsion to be nice to
them. I've spent too many years of my life cleaning up their messes.

The impudent young pup

Try to help and getting it wrong!

Drag him out and string him up.

--
There are no problems only situations

=========================================================================
Walrus Home alt.binaries.pictures.walpaper <=vote here every weekend.
weekly entries posted on
http://web.newsguy.com/evilsideshowbob/entries.html
FAQ found at http://members.rogers.com/heretic54/
(The most up to date version is posted in alt.binaries.pictures.walpaper
on Mondays and Thursdays. PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING)
Walrus websites: http://web.newsguy.com/evilsideshowbob/
For Contest Archives & Artists http://www.weeklywalrus.com
=========================================================================
 
M

ManoDestra

I love getting my words twisted by amateurs...

I did not contradict myself, if you read the response right. I said that it
never failed from an HTML form, the part that failed was after it got to
your email client and there was a problem with the email address or network
traffic, but never the form itself. The HTML part was sound. It has it's
applications in the real world, whether you like it or not.

I wasn't trying to advocate that sending email from a web page using the
mailto protocol was the all singing all dancing solution to sending email
via a browser. I've worked with client/server technology for years. I know
the limitations of the mailto: protocol. But it can still be useful for some
people who haven't worked with these technologies for as long as we have to
put a bit of HTML on a web page that sends an email back to the webmaster.
That gives "newbies" (not my term, yours) a great sense of accomplishment.
The desire to learn more. The desire to learn better ways of doing things.
Hey, just like you guys before you became so jaded, cynical and offensive to
the core.

To slag someone to death for suggesting a simpler solution than server-side
technologies is exceedingly distasteful and utterly unprofessional. There's
never one solution to anything. Any software engineer worth his salt should
know this and be able to weigh up the pros and cons of each solution.

If someone comes to me looking for a simple way to send feedback emails back
from his website, but his web server doesn't support cgi, what am I going to
say to him. Trash your current hosting and go somewhere else. Then what if
he can't afford that. I'm not going to be the one to say, never ever use the
mailto protocol, because you can. Fires up the client's email client, they
type in some text, click send and away goes the email to the webmaster as if
by magic. You cannot possibly shit on that. It is a legitimate and sensible
solution for this particular customer.

Let me tell you, you are not going to get far with the atrocious attitudes
you have displayed here. What goes around, comes around. You should be
ashamed of yourselves, acting like teenagers. I certainly shall not be
wasting any more of my time trying to teach you guys the merits of an open
minded attitude.

Incidentally, have you guys noticed that this newsgroup is called
alt.html.writers. Does that mean Perl? ASP? JSP? No. I didn't think so. It's
about writing HTML which is what I have been talking about all along. Here
endeth the lesson.

Peter.
 
P

Philip Ronan

If someone comes to me looking for a simple way to send feedback emails back
from his website, but his web server doesn't support cgi, what am I going to
say to him. Trash your current hosting and go somewhere else. Then what if
he can't afford that.

Personally I'd suggest a plain email link, although there are various other
free alternatives, e.g.

http://freedback.com/
http://www.response-o-matic.com/
http://formmail.to/

Just my 2p worth
 
D

Dan Brussee

That hasn't happened in this thread.


Well, yeah, it makes a fine moron detector, now that you mention it.

How bout we all get over ourselves already. I sure would hate to have a
client read the messages that get bandied about here sometimes.

1. Mailto does not work all the time. Everyone in agreement? Good.
2. Mailto does work a lot of the time. Still with me?
3. If the email is not mission critical, then go for it. As long as the
client knows it's limitations, it's up to them to decide if the costs
involved (time, monthly server costs, relying on yet ANOTHER host to
provide a service <sigh>) are worth the potential downside.

For example, if I was relying on a mailto link to provide a method of
getting orders for a product, I would certainly think twice. However, if
it was on my home page as a way for someone to bitch to me that I am not
perfect, then I really do not mind missing a few :)
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
473,743
Messages
2,569,478
Members
44,898
Latest member
BlairH7607

Latest Threads

Top