Making default entry in search text box disappear on click

[spence]

Hi All

How do I make it so that when a user clicks in a search text field, the
default entry (in this case "Search") is removed automatically - they
are then faced with a blank search box and can type straight away

Thanks in advance

[Alan J. Flavell]

On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Philip Ronan wrote:

[I'm reinstating the relevant context:]

Perhaps you're confusing "Javascript " with "Java"? "Alan J. Flavell" wrote:

You're very rude.
I'm sorry you think that way. I'm not *trying* to be rude. I'm just trying
to understand your point of view. I'm still confused.

You joined this thread by remarking that

What's insecure is allowing an untrusted site to execute javascript on
one's browser. The intended purpose is irrelevant for this. If you
don't yet know this, then you aren't in a position to argue about it.

Then you "clarified" your position by stating that

I'm saying that the design should never
*rely* on javascript being successfully executed. Using it to provide
optional extra conveniences is perfectly fine.

Those viewpoints just aren't consistent.

The inconsistency is only in your own mind. If you'd been paying
attention to any serious discussion on these principles, you wouldn't
be making such a silly claim.
If you check back through this thread, I think you'll find that my
suggested solution to the OP's problem doesn't *rely* on the
availability of Javascript, because the initial text can easily be
deleted by other means.

Then why are you raising this silly argument, if you already know that
one should not *rely* on javascript being available, and think you can
do it compatibly?

I conclude that your answer to my point was essentially "yes, I agree
with what you say, and if you read the detail of my earlier posting
you'll see that I'm already doing it that way, although I omitted to
say it in so many words".

It remains then only to discuss whether there's any point in
filling-in a default submission value, what that value could usefully
be, and how inconvenient it might or might not be for users to delete
it. But those detailed points are already being discussed by others
and I don't care to get involved in them. It was the more basic
principle that I felt I needed to dispute.

(Benjamin Niemann has calmly posted a solution which is compatible
with the principles which I'm promoting.)

all the best

[Philip Ronan]

"Jukka K. Korpela" wrote:

Philip Ronan <in*****@invali d.invalid> wrote:

Meanings. OK then. In your last post you said that using "Search"
as initial text is "... simply wrong because it's defined as
default text". So where *is* this definition?

In the HTML specification, as I explained. Did you already forget to
look for meanings, not words?

Then please take your own advice. Your argument has no basis other than a
bogus assertion based on your own biased judgement.

--
phil [dot] ronan @ virgin [dot] net
http://vzone.virgin.net/phil.ronan/

[Philip Ronan]

"Alan J. Flavell" wrote:

The inconsistency is only in your own mind. If you'd been paying
attention to any serious discussion on these principles, you wouldn't
be making such a silly claim.
Alan, earlier today you responded to my suggestion about using Javascript to
clear the initial contents of a search box as follows:
What's insecure is allowing an untrusted site to execute javascript on
one's browser. The intended purpose is irrelevant for this. If you
don't yet know this, then you aren't in a position to argue about it.
If you can't see the inconsistency between that statement and your
subsequent assertion that using Javascript to provide "extra conveniences"
is "fine" then frankly there's not much point in me trying to continue a
logical discussion here.
Then why are you raising this silly argument, if you already know that
one should not *rely* on javascript being available, and think you can
do it compatibly?
Please look back through this thread and check who said what. All I did was
propose a solution to the OP's question. Since then I've been dodging
brickbats from you and Jukka. I'm not the one raising silly arguments.
It remains then only to discuss whether there's any point in
filling-in a default submission value, what that value could usefully
be, and how inconvenient it might or might not be for users to delete
it.
In a nutshell, that's what this whole thread has been about.
But those detailed points are already being discussed by others
and I don't care to get involved in them. It was the more basic
principle that I felt I needed to dispute.

I see. So when you made your caustic remark about my suggestion to use
Javascript to clear the initial contents of a search box, you were *in fact*
making a general comment about the "basic principles" of Javascript? Perhaps
a better place for such comments would be in a thread where people are
discussing the basic principles of Javascript, and not its specific use as a
means of clearing the contents of a search box. Just to avoid confusion...

--
phil [dot] ronan @ virgin [dot] net
http://vzone.virgin.net/phil.ronan/

[Philip Ronan]

"Darin McGrew" wrote:

Philip Ronan <in*****@invali d.invalid> wrote:

You can also omit the submit button altogether. The form can still be
submitted without it.

Well, yes. And windows can still be scrolled even when the author removes
the scrollbars.

But it doesn't seem very user-friendly to remove the most obvious and most
familiar mechanisms for submitting a form or scrolling a window.

Don't know about you, but I normally use the return key to submit
single-line forms.

Take a look at <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/interact/forms.html#h-17.8>.
In the suggested replacement for the (deprecated) ISINDEX element, you'll
see a form with no submit button. There are no accessibility or
user-friendliness issues with this technique that I am aware of.

Incidentally, how do you scroll windows when there are no scroll bars?

--
phil [dot] ronan @ virgin [dot] net
http://vzone.virgin.net/phil.ronan/

[Darin McGrew]

Philip Ronan <in*****@invali d.invalid> wrote:

You can also omit the submit button altogether. The form can still be
submitted without it.

I wrote: Well, yes. And windows can still be scrolled even when the author removes
the scrollbars.

But it doesn't seem very user-friendly to remove the most obvious and most
familiar mechanisms for submitting a form or scrolling a window.

Philip Ronan <in*****@invali d.invalid> wrote: Don't know about you, but I normally use the return key to submit
single-line forms.
So do I. But I wouldn't try to hide the submit button from those who
normally use it.

I normally use shift-click and ctrl-shift-click to open links in new
windows. But I wouldn't try to hide the context menu from those who
normally use it.

I normally use ctrl-P to print web pages. But I wouldn't try to hide the
File > Print... menu from those who normally use it.

And so on.
Take a look at <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/interact/forms.html#h-17.8>.
In the suggested replacement for the (deprecated) ISINDEX element, you'll
see a form with no submit button. There are no accessibility or
user-friendliness issues with this technique that I am aware of.
The purpose of that example is to demonstrate a form that replicates the
deprecated ISINDEX element. If you add a submit button, then you've added
something beyond what ISINDEX provides, and the example is less clear.

Are there any other W3C example forms that omit the submit button?
Incidentally, how do you scroll windows when there are no scroll bars?

I generally use the keyboard (page up, page down, home, end, and arrows,
possibly modified by ctrl/shift). Mouse gestures work, too, for those so
inclined.
--
Darin McGrew, mc****@stanford alumni.org, http://www.rahul.net/mcgrew/
Web Design Group, da***@htmlhelp. com, http://www.HTMLHelp.com/

"When strong encryption is outlawed, only outlaws jvyy hfr fgebat rapelcgvba."

[Spartanicus]

Philip Ronan <in*****@invali d.invalid> wrote:

Don't know about you, but I normally use the return key to submit
single-line forms.

Take a look at <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/interact/forms.html#h-17.8>.
In the suggested replacement for the (deprecated) ISINDEX element, you'll
see a form with no submit button. There are no accessibility or
user-friendliness issues with this technique that I am aware of.

A user behaviour study [1] that I helped to set up and conduct clearly
showed that most users are lost when there is no submit button. Even
amongst computer literate under 35's the percentage was quite high.

[1] Internal company use only, results are not public.

--
Spartanicus

[Philip Ronan]

"Darin McGrew" wrote:

Take a look at <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/interact/forms.html#h-17.8>.
In the suggested replacement for the (deprecated) ISINDEX element, you'll
see a form with no submit button. There are no accessibility or
user-friendliness issues with this technique that I am aware of.
The purpose of that example is to demonstrate a form that replicates the
deprecated ISINDEX element.

Yes indeed it is.
If you add a submit button, then you've added
something beyond what ISINDEX provides, and the example is less clear.

Pardon?

--
phil [dot] ronan @ virgin [dot] net
http://vzone.virgin.net/phil.ronan/

[Philip Ronan]

"Spartanicu s" wrote:

A user behaviour study [1] that I helped to set up and conduct clearly
showed that most users are lost when there is no submit button. Even
amongst computer literate under 35's the percentage was quite high.

Fair enough. But if we're talking about a search box that appears on every
page of a website I'm sure people will soon figure out what it's for. Did
the buttonless search box in your study have any initial content?

--
phil [dot] ronan @ virgin [dot] net
http://vzone.virgin.net/phil.ronan/

[Alan J. Flavell]

On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Philip Ronan wrote:

"Alan J. Flavell" wrote:

The inconsistency is only in your own mind. If you'd been paying
attention to any serious discussion on these principles, you wouldn't
be making such a silly claim.
Alan, earlier today you responded to my suggestion about using Javascript to
clear the initial contents of a search box as follows:

What's insecure is allowing an untrusted site to execute javascript on
one's browser. The intended purpose is irrelevant for this. If you
don't yet know this, then you aren't in a position to argue about it.

If you can't see the inconsistency between that statement and your
subsequent assertion that using Javascript to provide "extra conveniences"
is "fine"

I've already pointed you to resources which I'd say will confirm that
my advice is consistent with the general conclusions of informed
discussion here and in other relevant forums. If you're still
resistant to those then I see little point in arguing with you further
on a one to one basis.
then frankly there's not much point in me trying to continue a
logical discussion here.

Indeed.

bye

[Darin McGrew]

Philip Ronan <in*****@invali d.invalid> wrote:

Take a look at <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/interact/forms.html#h-17.8>.
In the suggested replacement for the (deprecated) ISINDEX element, you'll
see a form with no submit button. There are no accessibility or
user-friendliness issues with this technique that I am aware of.

I wrote: The purpose of that example is to demonstrate a form that replicates the
deprecated ISINDEX element.
Philip Ronan <in*****@invali d.invalid> wrote:

Yes indeed it is. If you add a submit button, then you've added
something beyond what ISINDEX provides, and the example is less clear.

Pardon?

The example in the HTML 4 spec is not--nor was it intended to be--a good
example of an HTML form. It was intended to be an example of an HTML form
that replicates the deprecated ISINDEX functionality. Since ISINDEX doesn't
generate a submit button, the example form has no submit button.

If the example had included a submit button, then it would have been a
better example of a good HTML form. However, it would have been a worse
example of a form that merely replicates the deprecated ISINDEX
functionality.

Other forms shown in the HTML 4 spec, which are intended to be good
examples of an HTML form, do include submit buttons.
--
Darin McGrew, mc****@stanford alumni.org, http://www.rahul.net/mcgrew/
Web Design Group, da***@htmlhelp. com, http://www.HTMLHelp.com/

"When strong encryption is outlawed, only outlaws jvyy hfr fgebat rapelcgvba."