mailto works on my machine

[catyionic]

hi,

Due to trying many different form options, with none of them working,
I opted for this to receive info back from this site:
http:\\www.elderslastwish.com

<form name="feedback_form" method="post"
action="mailto:my****@yahoo.com?subject=Elder's Last Wish Application
Form" enctype="text/plain">

It works on my machine just fine. I have XP and I don't have Outlook
express on, I just use msn mail.

On another machine with XP and Outlook express, the email does not get
populated with the form results, and it sort of spaces out and nothing
happens, due to an Error with Outlook express.

Any clues, any similar experience? Any other options? Is mailto just
a dumb idea?

Thanks, Cat

[Philip Ronan]

On 27/8/04 12:26 am, catyionic wrote:

Is mailto just
a dumb idea?

Yes. It can't be guaranteed to work all the time, and in some situations it
is bound to fail.

You should use a script on yo0ur server to convert form data into an email.
Ask your web hosting company about what is available on your server.

--
Philip Ronan
ph***********@virgin.net
(Please remove the "z"s if replying by email)

[Tim]

On 26 Aug 2004 16:26:12 -0700,
ca******@yahoo.com (catyionic) posted:

Due to trying many different form options, with none of them working,
I opted for this to receive info back from this site:
http:\\www.elderslastwish.com
That should be // not \\, by the way.
<form name="feedback_form" method="post"
action="mailto:my****@yahoo.com?subject=Elder's Last Wish Application
Form" enctype="text/plain">

It works on my machine just fine. I have XP and I don't have Outlook
express on, I just use msn mail.
It won't work on mine, and *MANY* others. There's many website authoring
warnings about not doing that. Quite simply, don't do it.

Even <a href="mailto:fa*********@example.com">mail nobody</a> links don't
work on some of my systems. Despite there being a mail client installed
and fully set up, it just does NOT integrate with some of my web browsers.
Clicking on such links does absolutely nothing in them.

This sort of thing won't work for people using other people's computers
where they can't configure the software (e.g. libraries, internet cafes,
and computers at their place of work).
On another machine with XP and Outlook express, the email does not get
populated with the form results, and it sort of spaces out and nothing
happens, due to an Error with Outlook express.

Any clues, any similar experience? Any other options? Is mailto just
a dumb idea?

Yes it is. Forms are not meant to be used that way (with mailto: protocol
action addresses), and won't work for many people. Get yourself a proper
mail form handling script (e.g. the NMS ones, which are *much* better than
the Matt Wright ones), and a webhost that lets you use them. Though check
if your current host already offers you something similar, first.

--
If you insist on e-mailing me, use the reply-to address (it's real but
temporary). But please reply to the group, like you're supposed to.

This message was sent without a virus, please delete some files yourself.

[Stan Brown]

"Tim" <ti*@mail.localhost.invalid> wrote in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html:

Even <a href="mailto:fa*********@example.com">mail nobody</a> links don't
work on some of my systems. Despite there being a mail client installed
and fully set up, it just does NOT integrate with some of my web browsers.
Clicking on such links does absolutely nothing in them.

That's because your system is configured incorrectly, not because
there's anything wrong with the link.

I agree that hacks like trying to force a subject line are a bad
idea. But to tell somebody not to use a perfectly valid link just
because some visitors' systems are set up wrong -- that seems wrong
to me. That's almost like saying not to use mailto links at all
because some people don't have e-mail programs (e.g. users at public
kiosks).

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
validator: http://validator.w3.org/
CSS 2.1 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/
validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/

[Harlan Messinger]

"Stan Brown" <th************@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:MP************************@news.odyssey.net.. .

"Tim" <ti*@mail.localhost.invalid> wrote in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html:

Even <a href="mailto:fa*********@example.com">mail nobody</a> links don't
work on some of my systems. Despite there being a mail client installed
and fully set up, it just does NOT integrate with some of my web browsers.Clicking on such links does absolutely nothing in them.

That's because your system is configured incorrectly, not because
there's anything wrong with the link.

That's like having a feature on your web site that relies on the user
clicking with his second mouse button, and then telling Mac users who only
have one button on their mice that their computer is configured
"incorrectly". You are assuming that an aspect of the configuration with
which you are familiar is called for by standards, and that any system that
doesn't support the same whiz-bang is configured incorrectly, but that's not
true.

[Brian]

Harlan Messinger wrote:

"Stan Brown" wrote ...

"Tim" wrote

Even <a href="mailto:fa*********@example.com">mail nobody</a>
links don't work on some of my systems. Despite there being a
mail client installed and fully set up, it just does NOT
integrate with some of my web browsers. Clicking on such links does absolutely nothing in them.
That's because your system is configured incorrectly, not because
there's anything wrong with the link.

That's like having a feature on your web site that relies on the user
clicking with his second mouse button, and then telling Mac users
who only have one button on their mice that their computer is
configured "incorrectly".

right-click is not a registered protocol. mailto: is a registered protocol.
You are assuming that an aspect of the configuration with which you
are familiar is called for by standards,
mailto: is in the standards.

http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/intr...o.html#h-2.1.1
and that any system that doesn't support the same whiz-bang
email is "whiz-bang"? It's older than the www.
is configured incorrectly, but that's not true.

They may not have software to use the email protocol, just as they may
not have software to use the ftp protocol. So the author cannot rely on
a link being useful to a visitor. But the link is still correctly written.

--
Brian (remove ".invalid" to email me)
http://www.tsmchughs.com/

[Harlan Messinger]

"Brian" <us*****@julietremblay.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:10*************@corp.supernews.com...

Harlan Messinger wrote:

"Stan Brown" wrote ...

"Tim" wrote

Even <a href="mailto:fa*********@example.com">mail nobody</a>
links don't work on some of my systems. Despite there being a
mail client installed and fully set up, it just does NOT
integrate with some of my web browsers.

Clicking on such links does absolutely nothing in them.

That's because your system is configured incorrectly, not because
there's anything wrong with the link.

That's like having a feature on your web site that relies on the user
clicking with his second mouse button, and then telling Mac users
who only have one button on their mice that their computer is
configured "incorrectly".

right-click is not a registered protocol. mailto: is a registered

protocol.

The fact that http:, wais:, gopher:, and so forth are registered protocol
doesn't mean that computers without clients for those respective protocols
are configured "incorrectly".

You are assuming that an aspect of the configuration with which you
are familiar is called for by standards,
mailto: is in the standards.

http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/intr...o.html#h-2.1.1

This is a standard for a protocol called "mailto". It is a not a standard
for computers that says they must support this protocol.

and that any system that doesn't support the same whiz-bang
email is "whiz-bang"? It's older than the www.

Irrelevant to the question of whether a computer is "incorrectly" configured
just because some (or many) machines support an operation that it doesn't.

is configured incorrectly, but that's not true.

They may not have software to use the email protocol, just as they may
not have software to use the ftp protocol. So the author cannot rely on
a link being useful to a visitor. But the link is still correctly written.

I never said it wasn't.

[Brian]

Harlan Messinger wrote:

"Brian" wrote

Harlan Messinger wrote:

"Stan Brown" wrote ...

"Tim" wrote

> Even <a href="mailto:fa*********@example.com">mail nobody</a>
> links don't work on some of my systems. Despite there being
> a mail client installed and fully set up, it just does NOT
> integrate with some of my web browsers.

> Clicking on such links does absolutely nothing in them.

That's because your system is configured incorrectly, not
because there's anything wrong with the link.
I read Stan Brown's comment as applying specifically to the fact that
Tim has an email client, but the web browser does not integrate with it.

He makes no comment that an author should assume an email client.
Putting an email link on a page does not, by itself, assume an email
client. It only presents a uri for a client to use. As Stan Brown wrote
(quoted above), if something goes wrong, that's "not because there's
anything wrong with the link."
That's like having a feature on your web site that relies on the
user clicking with his second mouse button

"click with a mouse button" assumes the user has a mouse, and is thus
semantically different than "mailto:".
right-click is not a registered protocol. mailto: is a registered
protocol.

The fact that http:, wais:, gopher:, and so forth are registered
protocol doesn't mean that computers without clients for those
respective protocols are configured "incorrectly".

I said as much in my message, which you conveniently quoted:

They may not have software to use the email protocol, just as they
may not have software to use the ftp protocol. So the author cannot
rely on a link being useful to a visitor. But the link is still
correctly written.

--
Brian (remove ".invalid" to email me)
http://www.tsmchughs.com/

[Harlan Messinger]

"Brian" <us*****@julietremblay.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:10*************@corp.supernews.com...

Harlan Messinger wrote:

"Brian" wrote

Harlan Messinger wrote:
"Stan Brown" wrote ...

> "Tim" wrote
>
>> Even <a href="mailto:fa*********@example.com">mail nobody</a>
>> links don't work on some of my systems. Despite there being
>> a mail client installed and fully set up, it just does NOT
>> integrate with some of my web browsers.

>> Clicking on such links does absolutely nothing in them.
>
> That's because your system is configured incorrectly, not
> because there's anything wrong with the link.

I read Stan Brown's comment as applying specifically to the fact that
Tim has an email client, but the web browser does not integrate with it.

If that's the extent of what he intended, then I misunderstood.

[Shawn K. Quinn]

catyionic wrote:

Any clues, any similar experience?**Any*other*options?**Is*mailto*just
a dumb idea?

The W3C HTML standard specifically says that the results of a form action
are undefined for protocol besides HTTP.

I'll leave the judgement as to whether it's "just a dumb idea" up to you, in
light of the above.

--
Shawn K. Quinn

[catyionic]

Thanks for the feedback. I have scrapped the mailto idea and am now
fighting with the form offered on my webserver.

Over and out
cat

[Stan Brown]

"Brian" <us*****@julietremblay.com.invalid> wrote in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html:

I read Stan Brown's comment as applying specifically to the fact that
Tim has an email client, but the web browser does not integrate with it.

And that's precisely how I meant it. :-)

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
validator: http://validator.w3.org/
CSS 2.1 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/
validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/

[Tim]

"Tim" <ti*@mail.localhost.invalid> wrote

Even <a href="mailto:fa*********@example.com">mail nobody</a> links don't
work on some of my systems. Despite there being a mail client installed
and fully set up, it just does NOT integrate with some of my web browsers.
Clicking on such links does absolutely nothing in them.

Stan Brown <th************@fastmail.fm> posted:
That's because your system is configured incorrectly, not because
there's anything wrong with the link.
Actually, it's not. There simply isn't the option to do such things on
that system. Which was part of the point I was demonstrating.
I agree that hacks like trying to force a subject line are a bad
idea. But to tell somebody not to use a perfectly valid link just
because some visitors' systems are set up wrong -- that seems wrong
to me. That's almost like saying not to use mailto links at all
because some people don't have e-mail programs (e.g. users at public
kiosks).

I did say *even* those sorts of links don't work on some systems. It's a
warning that you're relying on something you can't rely on. You should
take such warnings into consideration. The best option is to provide a
good mail form, and it's nice to also provide a mailto link (though be sure
that you can handle the spam), but it's not a good idea to think that
providing a simple mailto: link will work for everyone, or that using a
broken form is going to work for everyone.

--
If you insist on e-mailing me, use the reply-to address (it's real but
temporary). But please reply to the group, like you're supposed to.

This message was sent without a virus, please delete some files yourself.