mailto: subject

[colin.]

Could someone please tell me what the correct code is to make a mailto: link
mail an address with a particular subject.

Many thanks

Colin

 

[Hywel]

Could someone please tell me what the correct code is to make a mailto: link
mail an address with a particular subject.

http://www.vortex-webdesign.com/help/faq.htm#mailtosubject

 

[colin.]

| In article <5HC_c.983$%[email protected]>, colin.
| says...
| > Could someone please tell me what the correct code is to make a mailto:
link
| > mail an address with a particular subject.
|
| http://www.vortex-webdesign.com/help/faq.htm#mailtosubject

I guess I won't be doing that then =p

 

[Martin Clark]

colin. wrote...

| In article <5HC_c.983$%[email protected]>, colin.
| says...
| > Could someone please tell me what the correct code is to make a mailto:
link
| > mail an address with a particular subject.
|
| http://www.vortex-webdesign.com/help/faq.htm#mailtosubject

I guess I won't be doing that then =p

That page is five years old and much of the information on it is more or
less out of date now. I have had subjects added to the email links on my
sites for 3 years now with no problems. The code is:
mailto:[email protected]?subject=This%20is%20the%20subject
with %20 to create a space.

 

[Michael Winter]

[snip]

That page is five years old and much of the information on it is more or
less out of date now. I have had subjects added to the email links on my
sites for 3 years now with no problems. [...]

How do you know? Just because no-one's told you that they've had problems,
doesn't mean that no-one ever has.

The very sensible advice:

"If it is essential that a subject and cc be used, it can be done
reliably by using a form, processed by a script that handles all of
the subject and cc chores."

is certainly not information that is out-of-date. Similarly,

"Unfortunately, there are also a good number of configurations in
which the e-mail will most disastrously fail to arrive in an
intelligible form."

is still true, especially with the prevalence of Web-based e-mail services.

Mike

 

[Martin Clark]

Michael Winter wrote...

[snip]

That page is five years old and much of the information on it is more
or less out of date now. I have had subjects added to the email
links on my sites for 3 years now with no problems. [...]

How do you know? Just because no-one's told you that they've had
problems, doesn't mean that no-one ever has.

I get a lot of email from the links on my sites. If some people's emails
had not been reaching me then I am sure that in 3 years somebody would
have complained about getting no response.

 

[Dylan Parry]

Spake Martin Clark unto thee:

I get a lot of email from the links on my sites. If some people's emails
had not been reaching me then I am sure that in 3 years somebody would
have complained about getting no response.

Er... yeah, and if people's emails had not been reaching you how would you
receive the complaints? Think about it. If they couldn't email you before,
then how would they complain? Telepathic rays?

 

[Hywel]

colin. wrote...
That page is five years old and much of the information on it is more or
less out of date now. I have had subjects added to the email links on my
sites for 3 years now with no problems. The code is:
mailto:[email protected]?subject=This%20is%20the%20subject
with %20 to create a space.

Excellent. A mal-formed URL. It won't work. Use a form and a server-
side handler if the subject must be pre-set. How many times do people
like you have to be told?

 

[Toby Inkster]

I get a lot of email from the links on my sites. If some people's emails
had not been reaching me then I am sure that in 3 years somebody would
have complained about getting no response.

They did complain, only you never received the complaimt because you used
?subject=.

 

[Martin Clark]

Dylan Parry wrote...

Spake Martin Clark unto thee:


Er... yeah, and if people's emails had not been reaching you how would you
receive the complaints? Think about it. If they couldn't email you before,
then how would they complain? Telepathic rays?

If it was a widespread problem then surely somebody would have spotted
that the subject was appearing as part of the email address and removed
it before complaining?

 

[Martin Clark]

Hywel wrote...

Excellent. A mal-formed URL. It won't work. Use a form and a server-
side handler if the subject must be pre-set. How many times do people
like you have to be told?

And rudeness helps how exactly? I am a newcomer to this ng and this is
the first time I have been made aware of this problem. I got the code
from html source books that suggested that only very old browsers could
not handle it. Are you saying that it does not work with some modern
browsers? What proportion of people are using browsers that cannot
handle it? I am willing to learn from those who know more than I do but
don't appreciate being called "people like you".

 

[Dylan Parry]

Spake Martin Clark unto thee:

If it was a widespread problem then surely somebody would have spotted
that the subject was appearing as part of the email address and removed
it before complaining?

Never underestimate the stupidity of the human race. Most people if they
sent you an email that got bounced back would get frustrated and likely
annoyed. If it didn't bounce back and you didn't get it, then the
likeliness is that the sender would think "jerk didn't reply to my email,
sod that, I'll take my custom elsewhere"

 

[Michael Winter]

[snip]

If it was a widespread problem then surely somebody would have spotted
that the subject was appearing as part of the email address and removed
it before complaining?

You're assuming that someone would actually complain. Despite the vast
numbers of badly written sites I've encountered on the Web, I've only ever
complained to one. With all the others, I just returned to the search
results and chose another site.

Why that one? Because I wanted to buy something there which would have
been cheaper than anywhere else. I notified them, received no response,
and spent a lot of money elsewhere. Their loss, not mine.

Unless your content is unique, I would expect users to just go somewhere
else. It's easier and quicker than sending an e-mail and waiting for the
company to update their site (if they'll even care to).

Besides, why risk it? It's not as though a contact form takes a vast
amount of effort to write.

Mike

 

[Martin Clark]

Dylan Parry wrote...

Spake Martin Clark unto thee:


Never underestimate the stupidity of the human race.

Fair point!

 

[Martin Clark]

Michael Winter wrote...

Unless your content is unique, I would expect users to just go
somewhere else. It's easier and quicker than sending an e-mail and
waiting for the company to update their site (if they'll even care
to).

Luckily my content *is* unique. It is not a company website nor am I
selling anything. People usually email with questions. I am bothered
about the idea that some people's emails have not got through and will
change the links.

Besides, why risk it? It's not as though a contact form takes a vast
amount of effort to write.

I avoided contact forms because I thought they wouldn't work if people
have javascript turned off. Am I wrong about that?

 

[Dylan Parry]

Spake Martin Clark unto thee:

I avoided contact forms because I thought they wouldn't work if people
have javascript turned off. Am I wrong about that?

Yes, contact forms use a server-side processor to send you the email. They
shouldn't need to rely on JavaScript.

 

[Tina - AffordableHOST, Inc.]

You should use a server side form processor. Chances are your host provides
one for you. Never use JavaScript for anything except "fluff". That is,
don't make JavaScript the only way a website visitor can contact you or
navigate around your website.

--Tina

 

[Michael Winter]

Hywel wrote...


And rudeness helps how exactly?

I wouldn't call it rudeness. Just frustration.

I am a newcomer to this ng and this is the first time I have been made
aware of this problem. I got the code from html source books that
suggested that only very old browsers could not handle it. Are you
saying that it does not work with some modern browsers? What proportion
of people are using browsers that cannot handle it?

It's more than just a simple question of, "Can the browser handle it?" The
user's computer needs to have a default mail client set up. However, this
isn't always possible.

Whilst at university, there was a configuration problem with the mail
client, meaning that it wouldn't start at all. If you tried to use a
mailto URI, you'd simply get an error.

Public places, such as libraries, are highly unlikely to support e-mail in
any way except though Web-based interfaces. How do you propose a mailto
link works in that circumstance?

What if the user doesn't know how to set up a default mail client? In this
situation, you could probably assume that they won't understand the cause,
or how to work around it.

I'm sure you could Google for more (and better) reasons. However, the fact
that there are circumstances that will cause a mailto link to fail would
suggest that avoiding the issue altogether with a form is a much more sane
approach than to ask: "In just how many instances will it fail?"

As I suggested in my other post, why risk failure when you can always have
success?

I am willing to learn from those who know more than I do but don't
appreciate being called "people like you".

I wouldn't take it personally. I doubt it was intended as such.

Mike

 

[Martin Clark]

Dylan Parry wrote...

Spake Martin Clark unto thee:


Yes, contact forms use a server-side processor to send you the email. They
shouldn't need to rely on JavaScript.

Thanks.

 

[Martin Clark]

Michael Winter wrote...

Whilst at university, there was a configuration problem with the mail
client, meaning that it wouldn't start at all. If you tried to use a
mailto URI, you'd simply get an error.

Public places, such as libraries, are highly unlikely to support e-mail
in any way except though Web-based interfaces. How do you propose a
mailto link works in that circumstance?

Good points I've never considered. So it's not just ?subject= that
cannot be depended on, but mailto: links in general? It's a good job I
was being dim earlier as it's definitely raised some issues.

I wonder how many other people reading this (experts excepted!) were
unaware that people accessing sites in libraries, etc. may not be able
to use mailto; links. From what I've seen, the majority of websites out
there depend on them for contact. I've already removed my "subjects" so
now I am going to add a form as an alternative means of contact. Thanks
to all who have made suggestions.