Can't get javascript events in php page.

washad

OK, there must be something I don't understand. I had a page stop working on me, and now I can't even get a simple event to trigger. The code below is the generated html code from my PHP page. I would think I would get an alert box when the page loads, but I don't. Any idea what I might be doing wrong?

<html>
<head>
	<title>The Jackson Family</title>

<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="CSS/master.css"/>

<script type="text/javascript">
	function testMe() {
		Alert("This is a test");
	}
</script>

</head>

<body onload="testMe()">


<div id="headerDiv">
	<div id="logoDiv">

	<H1>The Jackson<br/>Family</H1>	
</div>
</div>

<div id="linksDiv">
	<ul id="navlist">
		<li><a href="default.php">Home</a></li>
		<li><a href="joseph.php">Joseph's Page</a></li>
	</ul>

</div>



<div id="leftDiv"></div>
<div id="rightDiv"></div>
<div id="middleDiv">

</div>

</body>
</html>

bradgrafelman

That code should never have worked, unless you define a custom "Alert()" function somewhere; perhaps you meant alert() instead?

shawty

Java script is very very picky about case sensitivity in it's scripts.

You have to be exceptionally carefull with how you spell things, in your example you have:

Alert("This is a test");

if you correct that to:

alert("This is a test");

Then reload your page you'll find it works.

To compound matters, some browsers interpreters are more picky than others. For example, firefox will strictly adhere to using onClick= in an HTML tag where as internet explorer 6 will allow onclick= or onClick= or OnClick= but it will not allow ONCLICK= or Onclick, where as internet explorer 7 will allow all except ONCLICK=

To make things easier you should use a javascript library such as prototype, Jquery or Scriptalicious, these are all tested to be fully cross platform and i know from experience that Jquery works really well with PHP.

Cheers

Shawty

PS: This is not strictly a Javascript forum, you may want to try one of PHPBuilders sister sites on the internet.com network such as Javascript.com you'll get better advice from specialists in that particular field. 😉

bradgrafelman

shawty;10907291 wrote:
To compound matters, some browsers interpreters are more picky than others. For example, firefox will strictly adhere to using onClick= in an HTML tag where as internet explorer 6 will allow onclick= or onClick= or OnClick= but it will not allow ONCLICK= or Onclick, where as internet explorer 7 will allow all except ONCLICK=

Are you sure about that? I mean sure, invalid HTML markup (e.g. missing DOCTYPE) will send IE into quirks mode, but neither IE nor FireFox is really that strict in what it will or will not parse.

For example, changing this:

<body onload="testMe()">

to this:

<body oNlOaD="testMe()">

(or any other fun combinations of upper- and lower-case letters) still executes just fine in FireFox and IE6 (I don't have IE7 installed to test, but I would imagine it works just fine as well).

washad

Thank you

bradgrafelman

Don't forget to mark this thread resolved (if it is) using the link under the Thread Tools menu.

shawty

bradgrafelman;10907297 wrote:
Are you sure about that? I mean sure, invalid HTML markup (e.g. missing DOCTYPE) will send IE into quirks mode, but neither IE nor FireFox is really that strict in what it will or will not parse.

For example, changing this:
<body onload="testMe()">
to this:
<body oNlOaD="testMe()">
(or any other fun combinations of upper- and lower-case letters) still executes just fine in FireFox and IE6 (I don't have IE7 installed to test, but I would imagine it works just fine as well).

Absolutley certain brad, i've had quite a few problems with odd things like this, which is one of the reasons i'm so into using things like Jquery now beacuse they just completley kill any cross platform issues.

as for IE7 v's IE6, trust me there is a whole world of difference, and as for IE7 v's IE8 , don't even get me on my soap box about that one 😉

Cheers

Shawty

Weedpacket

shawty wrote:
To compound matters, some browsers interpreters are more picky than others. For example, firefox will strictly adhere to using onClick= in an HTML tag where as internet explorer 6 will allow onclick= or onClick= or OnClick= but it will not allow ONCLICK= or Onclick, where as internet explorer 7 will allow all except ONCLICK=

Strict HTML allows any capitalisation of attribute names; XHTML requires "onclick=". I suspect Firefox's behaviour is correct because breaking that would have raised a bug report back when it was still called Phoenix.

bradgrafelman wrote:
(or any other fun combinations of upper- and lower-case letters) still executes just fine in FireFox and IE6 (I don't have IE7 installed to test, but I would imagine it works just fine as well).

Using this code

<html><body onLOad="alert('Hello, World!')"></body></html>

I tried it; works fine.

I also tried different DOCTYPE declarations to see if they'd make a difference.
HTML 4.0 Strict: worked (FF3, IE6 & IE7)
XHTML 1.0 Strict: worked (FF3, IE6 & IE7) - even though the document isn't valid XHTML.
XHTML 1.1: worked (FF3, IE6 & IE7) - even though the document still isn't valid XHTML.

So I thought I'd use a more serious document (the one W3 offers as a template on their list of DTDS).

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">

<head>
	<title>An XHTML 1.0 Strict standard template</title>
	<meta http-equiv="content-type" 
		content="text/html;charset=utf-8" />
	<meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" />
</head>

<body onLOad="alert('Hello, World!')">

 <p ONCLICK="alert('click!')">… Your HTML content here …</p>

</body>
</html>

The onload and onclick events still fired.

shawty

Well, good luck to ya weed.

All i know, is i've has problems with it in the past, and thats why i answered with the answer i had, and i stand by my answer.

If you want to do it your way, thats entirely up to you, i know what works for me, and thats using Jquery (a occasionally Prototype or Dojo) , i very seldom use direct 'onClick=' in ANY HTML element these days (or any other for that matter) and i always make sure that all function call names are in lower case.

Javascript CAN and frequently is very picky in my opinion, and even though things are improving all the time, i'm by far not the only person who takes this view on the whole subject.

Cheers

Shawty

Weedpacket

shawty wrote:
i very seldom use direct 'onClick=' in ANY HTML element these days (or any other for that matter)

I avoid using it as well; on the principle of separating programmatic functionality from content, however, not because I couldn't figure out what was going on or my lack of faith or whatever causes my code to keep breaking when it's obviously not my fault.

All i know, is i've has problems with it in the past, and thats why i answered with the answer i had, and i stand by my answer.

This is how cargo cult programming starts.

and i always make sure that all function call names are in lower case.

Ditto personal pronouns, it appears. It's a bit self-belittling, don't you think?

shawty

Not really weed. :-)

I'm a practical person, i do what i need to do to get the job done, however i need to do it.

If someone shows me a better way, then i take it on board and use where needed, or investigate it further if need be. But for the most, to me it's all about getting the job done, then tidying it up later when it's working.

Cheers

Shawty

Weedpacket

shawty wrote:
If someone shows me a better way, then i take it on board and use where needed, or investigate it further if need be.

Except in this case, where you're "absolutely certain" that bradgrafelman's experiments didn't work the way he claimed they did. That doesn't sound like "investigation", even though it would imply that onclick works "better" than you thought it did. How do you know if something is "better" than an alternative if you don't even know the alternative?

If someone shows me a better way, then i take it on board and use where needed, or investigate it further if need be. But for the most, to me it's all about getting the job done, then tidying it up later when it's working.

Let me guess: you build a site then leave it to go build another one.

shawty

Originally Posted by shawty
If someone shows me a better way, then i take it on board and use where needed, or investigate it further if need be.

Except in this case, where you're "absolutely certain" that bradgrafelman's experiments didn't work the way he claimed they did. That doesn't sound like "investigation", even though it would imply that onclick works "better" than you thought it did. How do you know if something is "better" than an alternative if you don't even know the alternative?

Certain my methods work because i had no evidence to suggest they didn't, but brad didn't bend over backwards to try and be clever about it, he simply asked if i was certain to which i replied yes, you didn't, you felt that you had to go out and prove a point, quite why I've no idea, i don't claim my methods to be absolute right, I only claim they work for me, but you seem to have formed an opinion about me and the level of my knowledge, to which you some how think your superior. Each to their own, if thats what you want to believe thats what your entitled too.

I don't try to force people to my way of thinking, i deal only with the facts that i know, and like i say I'm always open to criticism, to be honest, i really don't care if onCLick v's OnClIck works, because i use Jquery 95% of the time, so i don't have to care.

If someone shows me a better way, then i take it on board and use where needed, or investigate it further if need be. But for the most, to me it's all about getting the job done, then tidying it up later when it's working.

Let me guess: you build a site then leave it to go build another one.
Yesterday 02:36 PM

Who said i only build websites? Oh thats right.. you!! after all, you've already worked out exactly what i know... oh well, I'll just admit defeat now then....

You have no idea what i build... but i guarantee you this much, There's a high probability that I've designed, and implemented systems larger than you can imagine, and I've broken a fair few too... oh and I'm not just a developer.

Weedpacket

i don't claim my methods to be absolute right

Actually, you do.

I only claim they work for me

Like the computer is going to care who's entering the code.

Each to their own, if thats what you want to believe thats what your entitled too.

Again, like the computer is going to care.

but you seem to have formed an opinion about me and the level of my knowledge, to which you some how think your superior.

Only based on what you have written. If you do know what you're talking about you aren't very good at showing it.

It's okay to be wrong (as you are in this case). But then instead of admitting it you refuse to admit the fact, saying that it's true for you even if it's not true for other people in some weird new-age politically-correct moral-relativist way.

Who said i only build websites? Oh thats right.. you!!

Where? Let me guess: you inhale, exhale, and occasionally defecate.

but i guarantee you this much, There's a high probability that I've designed, and implemented systems larger than you can imagine, and I've broken a fair few too...

Yawn. Mine's bigger than yours.

Weedpacket

shawty wrote:
brad didn't bend over backwards to try and be clever about it, he simply asked if i was certain to which i replied yes,

I'm looking at his post, and I note that he ran some experiments which invalidated your claim. You continued to insist that you were right.

you didn't

I did even less than bradgrafelman; I didn't ask, seeing as that had already been done. I just ran some more tests and left any conclusions up to the reader.

you felt that you had to go out and prove a point,

Yes, the point being that you were wrong.

I'm thinking it might be possible to achieve in some fashion involving using XHTML and serving the document under an XML header. But I suspect further that plenty of other problems would result. It might also be possible to replicate the problem by going back to 1990s-era (pre-DOM) browsers; but my memories of that period are hazy so I'm not absolutely certain.

Not that any of this has anything to do with the original poster's problem, which would have been addressed by bradgrafelman's reply.

shawty

SO where in ANY of my posts have i actually typed "My methods are the only ones that are right, and that they are the only ones that should be used?"

I've read back through all the previous, and all i can see are attempts by you to enforce your way of doing things, now thats good because the users of the forum can decide for them selves.

I answer posts with my answers, simple as... you don't have to follow them, you have a brain , no one has to follow them. In some cases, i'll add onto a post that says and this is the way i do it, which works for me. I make no claims that it works for anyone else, case fact the Jquery/content replacement thread by christiammarie. to which he/she replied, thanks for your input, but the previous post resolved it. Fair cop...

Unlike you, i didn't go all out to prove it should be my way or the highway. What works for me, works for me... Programming is all about exploration, and passion it's about discovering new techniques, not about following the rule book.

If i don't appear to show that i know what i'm doing, then maybee it's beacuse i have nothing to prove, or that i don't need to prove it. Unlike yourself who seems to take a delight in shouting people down.

and if the computer doesn't care whats been entered, then why do you care so much about weather what i type works or not?

If you don't like my posts, don't read them. Simple as.

shawty

If you feel your way is better than mine when replying, then add a post that says, and this is the way i do it, make your own mind up.

Last point....

If your in any doubt as to me knowing that i know my stuff, then maybe you should take a look at the articles i write for PHP builder. Particularly the advanced CLI one, and tell me truthfully. Would you ever consider using PHP for something like that? Probably not, because your stuck in your own little "PHP is a web programming language" circle, and you don't have the passion to explore and see if something radical works.

This is the second time you've replied in any capacity to any thread I've been involved in, and both times you have started the fight, I'm ending this now because I'm just not interested in what you have to say anymore.

Your javascript onClick or what ever works for you, great. my Methods work for me, great. both our ways work for both of us, I'm not wrong, and I'm not right, and neither are you.

hdsprint

Just my two cents worth, though I am no expert on Java, but I too have had problems with case sensitivity. OnClick, OnMouseOver, etc. failed to work until I made them all lowercase.

I think the argument is juvenile. Sometimes it works for some, sometimes it don't. Shawty offered a possible solution, if it didn't work then I'm sure he would have gone out of his way to help find the solution. So what's the beef?

bradgrafelman

hdsprint wrote:
So what's the beef?

No idea, but it's over; both sides have clearly represented their opinions on the matter, so no further replies are necessary (nor will they appear for very long).

Now... back to the original reason this thread was started? 🙂

shawty

Thanks brad, works for me 🙂