By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
449,081 Members | 861 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 449,081 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Loading page and staring half way down

P: n/a
I'm trying to go to a new page, but I want it to jump straight to a
specific part of the page instead of starting at the top of the page.

Anyone got any idea on how this is done?

I was trying to get it to work with a <a name="here"> tag, but the
browser ignores the #here on the end of my cgi script name.

I tried using javascript and the onload event to rewrite the url, but
I couldn't get that to work either.

Is it possible to go to a web page and have it start half way down, or
can you only do this on the same page?

Kerrin
Jul 23 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
8 Replies


P: n/a
On 26 Sep 2004 05:32:54 -0700, Kerrin wrote:

I am not sure I understand you correctly, but..
Is it possible to go to a web page and have it start half way down, or
can you only do this on the same page?
Sure, this should start you part way down the JS FAQ
<http://www.jibbering.com/faq/#FAQ4_32>
I was trying to get it to work with a <a name="here"> tag, but the
browser ignores the #here on the end of my cgi script name.


There must be somthing wrong with your
a) HTML (or the HTML your CGI script is writing)
b) CGI script
c) Browser

I would put my money on a) or b), and my first suggestion is
to produce a static HTML page that you have validated* and
can link to an anchor before you proceed.

* <http://validator.w3.org/>

HTH

--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology
http://www.lensescapes.com/ Images that escape the mundane
Jul 23 '05 #2

P: n/a
Sorry, I don't think I was clear about the issue I was having.

The problem is I have a page that links to another page, except I want
it to open the page half way down, and I want to call a cgi script to
get there.
There are multiple pages, and they cross reference each other. Because
of this I want to use a single form to do all the cross referencing,
so the destination and tag name are dynamic.
I was using javascript to modify the form action to append the
#<name>, but IE won't allow me to do this (NetScape was fine and
worked as I wanted).

So now I need the load the page, and then after the page has loaded,
move the page down to the selected section. So when the page loads the
#<name> is not there, and I simply wish to use the onload event to
move the page.

So all I need to know is how do you make javascript move the page to
the <a name="blah"> tag?

Kerrin

Andrew Thompson <Se********@www.invalid> wrote in message news:<13******************************@40tude.net> ...
On 26 Sep 2004 05:32:54 -0700, Kerrin wrote:

I am not sure I understand you correctly, but..
Is it possible to go to a web page and have it start half way down, or
can you only do this on the same page?


Sure, this should start you part way down the JS FAQ
<http://www.jibbering.com/faq/#FAQ4_32>
I was trying to get it to work with a <a name="here"> tag, but the
browser ignores the #here on the end of my cgi script name.


There must be somthing wrong with your
a) HTML (or the HTML your CGI script is writing)
b) CGI script
c) Browser

I would put my money on a) or b), and my first suggestion is
to produce a static HTML page that you have validated* and
can link to an anchor before you proceed.

* <http://validator.w3.org/>

HTH

Jul 23 '05 #3

P: n/a
On 27 Sep 2004 04:50:38 -0700, Kerrin wrote:
Sorry, I don't think I was clear about the issue I was having.
Posting replese on top does not assist clarity
Kerrin, please post comments below and trim..
<http://www.physci.org/codes/javafaq.jsp#netiquette>

See further comments in that style.
Andrew Thompson <Se********@www.invalid> wrote in message news:<13******************************@40tude.net> ...
On 26 Sep 2004 05:32:54 -0700, Kerrin wrote:

I am not sure I understand you correctly, but..
Is it possible to go to a web page and have it start half way down, or
can you only do this on the same page?
Sure, this should start you part way down the JS FAQ
<http://www.jibbering.com/faq/#FAQ4_32> The problem is I have a page that links to another page, except I want
it to open the page half way down, and I want to call a cgi script to
get there.
There are multiple pages, and they cross reference each other. Because
of this I want to use a single form to do all the cross referencing,
so the destination and tag name are dynamic.
This all sounds like a very confusing navigation
system Kerrin, are you sure it is a good idea, rather
than 'heck, we have the technology'?
I was using javascript to modify the form action to append the
#<name>,
This will fail for any browser with JS disabled.

That is not a wise thing to rely on in a navigation system.
A navigation system can be imporved by use of script, but
it needs to be fully functional without it. Which means..
..but IE won't allow me to do this (NetScape was fine and
worked as I wanted).
Netscape with JS enabled, any other UA with JS enabled, ..maybe.
So now I need the load the page, and then after the page has loaded,
move the page down to the selected section. So when the page loads the
#<name> is not there, and I simply wish to use the onload event to
move the page.

So all I need to know is how do you make javascript move the page to
the <a name="blah"> tag?

....
I was trying to get it to work with a <a name="here"> tag, but the
browser ignores the #here on the end of my cgi script name.
.... There must be somthing wrong with your
a) HTML (or the HTML your CGI script is writing)
b) CGI script
c) Browser
d) your basic design
I would put my money on a) or b),


I was wrong, it is seeming like it is d).

Make the site function with JS disabled first, then
improve it with DHTML.

--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology
http://www.lensescapes.com/ Images that escape the mundane
Jul 23 '05 #4

P: n/a
> Posting replese on top does not assist clarity
I was trying to rephrase the entire question and thought it would be
clearer all thogether at the top, instead of spread out in the post
for the sake of it.
As for putting it at the top, I'm sorry, I haven't been a regular
poster in years and thought it was the correct place to put it. Now
you have so politely slapped my wrists I'll be good. And I didn't even
moan about the fact you clearly didn't proof read you post before
posting it (as you can see in the above quote). Oh whoops, I guess I
did.
Kerrin, please post comments below and trim.. Yes, I should have trimmed, we can't all be prefect all the time.
This all sounds like a very confusing navigation
system Kerrin, are you sure it is a good idea, rather
than 'heck, we have the technology'?
Yes, I have got a little carried away with the original idea I had for
this area of the site.
This will fail for any browser with JS disabled.
Well considering that you have no idea what the site is, you have made
an assumption that the site is conventional, which it isn't. I'm
afraid the site that this is for requires JS (it wouldn't be possible
otherwise), so I saw no harm in using it on the area of the site.
d) your basic design
I was wrong, it is seeming like it is d).
I never saw the point of flaming people, why can't people be polite? I
just wanted to know the answer to a question, and I am greatful of
your help.
Make the site function with JS disabled first, then
improve it with DHTML.


I was intending on rethinking this area of the site, but the site as a
whole will require JS.

Kerrin
Jul 23 '05 #5

P: n/a
On 27 Sep 2004 14:21:59 -0700, Kerrin wrote:
Kerrin, please post comments below and trim.. Yes, I should have trimmed, we can't all be prefect all the time.


All the contributors to this thread thus far are human
(so far as I know). That precludes perfect.

Your efforts to trim are appreciated.
This all sounds like a very confusing navigation system ..


Yes, I have got a little carried away with the original idea I had for
this area of the site.


I think that is an important realisation.

Perhaps you need to take a step back from it and take
a pause as you decide how to proceed, and the best form
of the navigation*.
This will fail for any browser with JS disabled.


Well considering that you have no idea what the site is, you have made
an assumption that the site is conventional, which it isn't.


No, I made several assumptions, amongst which were that
the site needs to work meaningfully for users with pure HTML
browsers*, such as..

* Search engines being an important section of that group.
..I'm
afraid the site that this is for requires JS (it wouldn't be possible
otherwise), so I saw no harm in using it on the area of the site.
Pointing them towards a page explaining (with screen shots)
- the wonderful tools you are creating for their benefit
- the technology (JS) upon which it is based
- the way to enable JS in a variety of browsers**.

** This is more important than you might think, as
most web-surfers would not know how to do it.
d) your basic design
I was wrong, it is seeming like it is d).


I never saw the point of flaming people, why can't people be polite?


(chuckles) That was not a flame, your
ass ain't even smokin'! ;-)
..I
just wanted to know the answer to a question, and I am greatful of
your help.


You're welcome!
Make the site function with JS disabled first, then
improve it with DHTML.


I was intending on rethinking this area of the site, but the site as a
whole will require JS.


That's fine. I have sections of my site that only make
sense when the user has Java, but each page (sometimes,
though *very* rarely, it makes sense to have no page at
all) degrades to a simple message for 'no Java' and 'Java
disabled' clients, to let them know what *should* be there.

Perhaps I ahould have made those points more clear in
my original reply.

There is a lot to making a great site, one of the most
fundamental things is to make a site that can be logically
traversed and indexed by the search bots, and that can
only be done in HTML.

But of course, I am making further assumptions (you want
it indexed on Google). Perhaps we might cirvumvent too
many more guesses with an URL.

Where's your site?

--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology
http://www.lensescapes.com/ Images that escape the mundane
Jul 23 '05 #6

P: n/a
Andrew Thompson <Se********@www.invalid> wrote in message news:<m6****************************@40tude.net>.. .
On 27 Sep 2004 14:21:59 -0700, Kerrin wrote: Pointing them towards a page explaining (with screen shots)
- the wonderful tools you are creating for their benefit
- the technology (JS) upon which it is based
- the way to enable JS in a variety of browsers**.

** This is more important than you might think, as
most web-surfers would not know how to do it.
That is a good point, and one I intend to use.
I never saw the point of flaming people, why can't people be polite?


(chuckles) That was not a flame, your
ass ain't even smokin'! ;-)


Well, I found it a little warm for my liking.
But of course, I am making further assumptions (you want
it indexed on Google). Perhaps we might cirvumvent too
many more guesses with an URL.
Yes I will be submitting the site to search engines when it is ready,
but I still have to do that. I am only now writting the manual (which
is the section my question was for.)
Where's your site?


http://kerrin.zapto.org

The site is far from finished. There is plenty wrong with it, that I
intend to fix.

Kerrin
Jul 23 '05 #7

P: n/a
On 28 Sep 2004 03:25:37 -0700, Kerrin wrote:
http://kerrin.zapto.org
I feel we've made more progress in that line, than in
all the previous posts (I have a thing about seeing
what we are talking about)
The site is far from finished.
The first step in a thousand mile journey, ehh?
I have 4 sites, & feel I have reached the second step
of that journey or (waggles hand) maybe the third. ;-)
..There is plenty wrong with it, that I
intend to fix.


Puhh! Enough disclaimers, let's have a quick look.

I will leave the JS comments to those are good at it
( I had you fooled into thinking I was one of them for
a few moments there, didn't I? ;-), instead I will just
make a few quick comments about useability and design.

1) I have no problem seeing the text on the left, but
some will. If your users are not guaranteed better than
18/18 vision, you might think about increasing the contrast,
which you might do by making the text white, or light gray.

2) <http://kerrin.zapto.org/cgi/page.cgi>
In the select for screen size..
a) Some users will be 'not listed' in the list of 4 you
provide, my (relatively old) monitor has 5 settings between
widths of 800&1280 width, and your list does not account for
users with very old screens, moderately hi-tech screens, or
twin screens. You might add three further fields, '<800x600'
'>1600x1200' and 'Other' for the rest.
b) Also, you do not need to put 1600x1200 first to make it default,
simply specify the 'selected' attribute.
<http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/interact/forms.html#h-17.6.1>

3) Just what is that screensize select for? It is unnecessary
for the pages you already have, so I guess it is for functionality
that happens after registering, is that right?

4) Get in touch with your inner validator (very Zen, huhh?)
<http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://kerrin.zapto.org/cgi/page.cgi>
Valid HTML is necessary to ensure that everything else
has a solid foundation. If your HTML is not valid,
all bets are off as to how it will render, and how JS
will (or will fail to) interact with it.

5) Ditto the styles..
<http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http://kerrin.zapto.org/styles.css>

It might pay to put up a page that briefly describes the ultimate
content of the site, perhaps screen shots, to give helpers a better
idea of the appropriateness of your styles and design (especially
in relation to a 'JS only' functionality).

For instance, I have this (vague) impression of a fairly
youthful audience signing up for games and which might
appear in a limited number of standard screen sizes.
(But I still do not know that, and you have not stated!)

HTH

--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology
http://www.lensescapes.com/ Images that escape the mundane
Jul 23 '05 #8

P: n/a
> 1) I have no problem seeing the text on the left, but
some will. If your users are not guaranteed better than
18/18 vision, you might think about increasing the contrast,
which you might do by making the text white, or light gray.
I will be getting new graphics (again) for the site this evening, I'm
not a graphics person, so I'm just putting in what ever I get and
giving feed back on changes. (You should have seen the previous
version! Green text on a blue background!)
2) <http://kerrin.zapto.org/cgi/page.cgi>
In the select for screen size..
a) Some users will be 'not listed' in the list of 4 you
provide
The list there is for testing only, to be honest I don't like that,
and have plans on doing it automatically.
3) Just what is that screensize select for? It is unnecessary
for the pages you already have, so I guess it is for functionality
that happens after registering, is that right?
It's used to calculate how much board can be shown to the user. Don't
feel scared about registering, the site doesn't bite. With out
registering you have seen 1% of the sites functionality (and a very
dull bit at that).
4) Get in touch with your inner validator (very Zen, huhh?)


I will, at a later time.

Kerrin
Jul 23 '05 #9

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.