onChange

**Blue Raja** · Jul 23 '05, 12:10 PM

Re: onChange

"Michele" <guardwife@eart hlink.net> wrote in message
news:5e4f6869.0 407121248.1fd7a bb9@posting.goo gle.com...[color=blue]
> I am creating a web page that has a select box. Depending on what is
> selected, I would like to display certain checkboxes.
>
> Example:
> If '100 Level' is selected, I want 2 checkboxes. 1)Name Purchased &
> 2)Solicit info
>
> If '200 Level' is selected, I want 4 checkboxes. 1)Email w/Link
> 2)Letter for Coordinator 3)Financial Aid Info & 4)Email from Dean
>
> Etc....
>
> Is there any way to do this with Javascript?[/color]

Here's an (incomplete) implementation:

<html>
<head>
<style type="text/css">
.checkboxes
{ border: 1px dashed #000000;
padding: 2px; }
</style>
<script type="text/javascript">

</script>
<body>
<form>
<select onchange="displ ay_cbs(this.sel ectedIndex);">
<option value="0">---</option>
<option value="1">100 Level</option>
<option value="2">200 Level</option>
</select>
<div id="cbs1" class="checkbox es" style="display: none;">
Name purchased: <input type="checkbox" ><br>
Solicit info: <input type="checkbox" >
</div>
<div id="cbs2" class="checkbox es" style="display: none;">
Email w/ link: <input type="checkbox" ><br>
Letter for co-ordinator: <input type="checkbox" ><br>
Financial Aid Info: <input type="checkbox" ><br>
Email from Dean: <input type="checkbox" ><br>
</div>
</form>
</body>
</html>

On the server-side one would check the SELECT to see which group had been
chosen and then test for those values, discarding the others as irrelevant.

Hope that helps.

--

Jason, aka The Blue Raja

**Richard Cornford** · Jul 23 '05, 12:10 PM

Re: onChange

Blue Raja wrote:
<snip>[color=blue]
> <script type="text/javascript">
> <!-- // BEGIN JS HIDING[/color]
<snip> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^

What is this nonsense doing in a script element?

Richard.

**Blue Raja** · Jul 23 '05, 12:11 PM

Re: onChange

"Richard Cornford" <Richard@litote s.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cd10j4$9h2 $1$8300dec7@new s.demon.co.uk.. .[color=blue]
> Blue Raja wrote:
> <snip>[color=green]
> > <script type="text/javascript">
> > <!-- // BEGIN JS HIDING[/color]
> <snip> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^
>
> What is this nonsense doing in a script element?[/color]

HTML commenting to hide the script from JS incompatible browsers, although
it doesn't seem to be included in scripts on this group. What's the reason
for the aversion to script hiding?

--

Jason, aka The Blue Raja

**Lee** · Jul 23 '05, 12:11 PM

Re: onChange

Blue Raja said:[color=blue]
>
>"Richard Cornford" <Richard@litote s.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:cd10j4$9h 2$1$8300dec7@ne ws.demon.co.uk. ..[color=green]
>> Blue Raja wrote:
>> <snip>[color=darkred]
>> > <script type="text/javascript">
>> > <!-- // BEGIN JS HIDING[/color]
>> <snip> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^
>>
>> What is this nonsense doing in a script element?[/color]
>
>HTML commenting to hide the script from JS incompatible browsers, although
>it doesn't seem to be included in scripts on this group. What's the reason
>for the aversion to script hiding?[/color]

It serves no purpose other than as a potential source of error.
The percentage of incompatible browsers in use fell below 0.001%
several years ago.

**Blue Raja** · Jul 23 '05, 12:11 PM

Re: onChange

"Lee" <REM0VElbspamtr ap@cox.net> wrote in message
news:cd27rg01vd 4@drn.newsguy.c om...[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >> <snip>
> >> > <script type="text/javascript">
> >> > <!-- // BEGIN JS HIDING
> >> <snip> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^
> >>
> >> What is this nonsense doing in a script element?[/color]
> >
> >HTML commenting to hide the script from JS incompatible browsers,[/color][/color]
although[color=blue][color=green]
> >it doesn't seem to be included in scripts on this group. What's the[/color][/color]
reason[color=blue][color=green]
> >for the aversion to script hiding?[/color]
>
> It serves no purpose other than as a potential source of error.
> The percentage of incompatible browsers in use fell below 0.001%
> several years ago.[/color]

Fair enough, I wasn't aware how low the figures had gotten.
Thanks for the info.

--

Jason, aka The Blue Raja

**Lasse Reichstein Nielsen** · Jul 23 '05, 12:11 PM

Re: onChange

"Blue Raja" <the_blue_raja. spamless@iprimu s.com.au> writes:
[color=blue]
> Fair enough, I wasn't aware how low the figures had gotten.
> Thanks for the info.[/color]

I don't know the numbers (96% of all statistics are made up on the
spot anyway), but the browsers in the most common browser families,
that doesn't understand the script tag are:
Netscape prior to version 2 (Mar 1996 - i.e., Netscape 1 and 1.1)
IE prior to version 3 (Aug 1996 (guessing, it is in IE 3, don't have IE 2))
Opera prior to version 2 (Feb 1997)
Lynx prior to version 2.60 (1996?)
(most other browser families are later than this and have understood
the script tag from day one).

There might be other HTML tools than browsers that still doesn't
understand the script tag. If you use one of these, and for some
reason can't get an updated version that understands HTML 3.2, then I
guess you'll have to put the hiding in there on your own pages
(perhaps only while developing the page). The rest of us can happily
forget all about it :)

/L
--
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen - lrn@hotpop.com
DHTML Death Colors: <URL:http://www.infimum.dk/HTML/rasterTriangleD OM.html>
'Faith without judgement merely degrades the spirit divine.'

**Richard Cornford** · Jul 23 '05, 12:11 PM

Re: onChange

Blue Raja wrote:[color=blue]
> Richard Cornford wrote:[color=green]
>> Blue Raja wrote:
>> <snip>[color=darkred]
>> > <script type="text/javascript">
>> > <!-- // BEGIN JS HIDING[/color]
>> <snip> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^
>>
>> What is this nonsense doing in a script element?[/color]
>
> HTML commenting to hide the script from JS incompatible
> browsers,[/color]

But its context follows a STYLE element that does not feature similar
"hiding" and the browsers that don't understand SCRIPT don't understand
STYLE either (so they write the unhidden STYLE content into the
displayed text output in the same way as they would write an unhidden
SCRIPT into the content).
[color=blue]
> although it doesn't seem to be included in scripts on this
> group. What's the reason for the aversion to script hiding?[/color]

It represents people doing things without understanding what they are
doing or why they are doing it; a mystical incantation rather than a
design decision.

Realising exactly how old the browsers that suffer from not
understanding SCRIPT elements are immediately makes it obvious that this
technique is no longer necessary (and has not been for some considerable
time). Using it in a script that goes on to employ the W3C DOM Core -
getElementById - method without verifying that it is implemented in the
current environment (or attempting to provide any safe fall-back
emulation) makes it doubly clear that the "hiding" is not understood, as
two generations of browsers occupy the gap between the introduction of
client-side scripting and the first implementations of W3C DOM methods
in browsers. Leaving a script that appears to be worrying about ancient
and extinct browsers but that will predictably error-out on the older of
the browsers that are still in use.

An evident contradiction that is re-enforced again by the realisation
that the script has been predicated on an ability to switch the CSS
display property and have the browser dynamically respond to the action.
Making it a script that is needlessly designed to give an unusable GUI
on javascript disabled browsers, browsers pre-dating the W3C DOM and W3C
standard browsers that are not sufficiently dynamic to facilitate the
switching of the display property (such as Opera <= 6 and NetFront).
After that it seems a bit superfluous to be trying to prevent some
dinosaur browser from writing the contents of a script element into its
displayed text.

Richard.

onChange

onChange

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment