[RESOLVED] Problem with database field and text area

Jazzy_Girl

Hi, I need to use a text area in a form instead of an input field so a larger amount of text can be inserted. When I try to use this

value="<?php echo $row[databasefield];?>" like I do in my input fields
<input value="<?php echo $row[databasefield];?>" name="databasefield">

and try to use it in a text area field instead.

The database property won't appear in the form like it will with an input field. How do I adjust for the text area field to show the database info instead? Right now nothing is appearing in the text area field. Thank you very much.

NogDog

<textarea rows="5" cols="25" name="databasefield"><?php 
echo $row[databasefield];?></textarea>

Jazzy_Girl

Geeeeze, who would have expected that! Thanks again Nog!!!!

Roger_Ramjet

Bookmark this W3C HTML Manual and use it to learn html properly.

NogDog

Roger Ramjet wrote:
Bookmark this W3C HTML Manual and use it to learn html properly.

Or go straight to the source (including the index of elements and the index of attributes).

Jazzy_Girl

Cmon, there's no need for that. I'm sure you don't know all the rules Roger. I'm not a programmer, I'm just trying to make my web site better.

Roger_Ramjet

Well,
a) html is not a programming language
b) html is easy to learn
c) the link I gave you is to a very good site with very clear documentation of all html elements including what is required and what optional values are permitted, it also give very good examples on all of this
d) it also includes very easy tutorials to teach you html in easy steps
e) it is not neccessary to 'know' it all, not is it possible: I know how to find out what I need to know when I need to know it, and how to use what I find
f) I did not mean to be rude or put you down, just to help you to learn more, that is why I gave you that great link

Jazzy_Girl

I don't think you would have said this if that were true. Use it to learn html properly. Or said these:
a) html is not a programming language
b) html is easy to learn
Lighten up and worry about world issues instead of lecturing us.

Roger_Ramjet

Lighten up yourself.

Weedpacket

a) html is not a programming language

This is true.

NogDog

HTML may be "easy" compared to assembly language programming, but try taking a random sampling of web pages from major web sites and run them through the HTML Validator, and it would seem that using it correctly is apparently not a "walk in the park" for everyone.

yahoo.com: 37 errors
google.com: 66 errors
amazon.com: 1083 errors :eek:
My home page: 0 errors 🙂

Roger_Ramjet

Amazon does not surprise me, I don't think they've changed it much in 7 years so it's probably written as html 2 or 3.

Thing is, they all work even with those validity problems which hardly makes them errors now does it.

Most web designers are not trained programmers which is why they write such sloppy code - and have so much trouble getting their heads aroud CSS, which I think is also pretty easy. Not to mention those that just use the crappy code spewed out by Frontpage and the like. Yet they still manage to produce working websites and in the end what else matters. It is only pedants like ourselves who worry about it.

laserlight

Thing is, they all work even with those validity problems which hardly makes them errors now does it.

They are still errors in the sense that they are failures to conform to the standard. That they still 'work' is due to web browsers being lax and compensating for possible errors and quirks of HTML code in the wild.

NogDog

...It is only pedants like ourselves who worry about it.

Yep. Possibly the a company's lawyers will take interest, though, should it turn out that those errors result in their pages being virtually unintelligible to text-to-speech readers and their company gets sued by some advocates for the visually impaired.

One would suspect that such prominent web sites would be testing their sites for accessibility to avoid such things, but I'd bet it would consume a lot less effort on their part if they'd constructed their pages correctly from the start.

But I digress (like a good pedant should).... 😉