Email Script

[TomatoeMan]

I'm using the following script on my web site. I have done this in
order to keep web spider programs from harvesting my email address.

I want to have the "Subject" line filled in also.

Does anyone know how I can do that?

Thanks

---------------------------------------------

<script language="javascript">

<!--

var contact = " Contact MySiteName"

var email = "myname"

var emailHost = "MySiteName.com"

document.write("<a href=" + "mail" + "to:" + email + "@" +
emailHost+ ">" + contact + "</a>")

//-->

</script>

[Hywel]

In article <td********************************@4ax.com>, TomatoeMan
says...

I'm using the following script on my web site. I have done this in
order to keep web spider programs from harvesting my email address.

I want to have the "Subject" line filled in also.

Does anyone know how I can do that?

Use a server-side form handler. Trying it with mailto won't work.

--
Hywel

http://sponsorhywel.org.uk/

[Philip Ronan]

On 4/10/04 9:59 pm, TomatoeMan wrote:

I'm using the following script on my web site. I have done this in
order to keep web spider programs from harvesting my email address.

I want to have the "Subject" line filled in also.

Does anyone know how I can do that?

Basically you need to form a link with an href that looks like this:

mailto:[e-mail]?subject=This%20is%20the%20 subject
(Note: you have to use "%20" instead of spaces in the subject line)

But beware. There appear to be robots out there that can extract email
addresses from simple Javascripts like this. You would be better off using a
stronger form of scrambling. Here's one you could try:

<http://freespace.virgin.net/phil.ronan/scramble.html>

Hope that helps.

Phil

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

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <BD**************************@virgin.net>, dated Mon, 4
Oct 2004 22:09:40, seen in news:comp.lang.javascript, Philip Ronan
<ph***********@virgin.net> posted :

On 4/10/04 9:59 pm, TomatoeMan wrote:

I'm using the following script on my web site. I have done this in
order to keep web spider programs from harvesting my email address.

I want to have the "Subject" line filled in also.

Does anyone know how I can do that?

Basically you need to form a link with an href that looks like this:

mailto:[e-mail]?subject=This%20is%20the%2 0subject
(Note: you have to use "%20" instead of spaces in the subject line)

This question, too, should be a <FAQENTRY>, to point out that mailto:...
can only work on systems with an appropriately-configured browser-mailer
interface (and that not all of those can do Subject).

Moreover, the person who wants to send mail is not necessarily the
person who "owns" the browser.

Therefore, there should always be a means of giving the E-mail address
independently of mailto:.
One should never say that mailto: does not work; for many users, it
demonstrably does work.
--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME ©
Web <URL:http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/tsfaq.html> -> Timo Salmi: Usenet Q&A.
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/news-use.htm> : about usage of News.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.

[Randy Webb]

Dr John Stockton wrote:

<--snip-->

One should never say that mailto: does not work; for many users, it
demonstrably does work.

I don't recall reading very many posts where it was said that mailto:
does not work, but I have read many many posts where it was said that it
was unreliable, since it is unreliable in a web environment.

--
Randy
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq

[Andrew DeFaria]

Dr John Stockton wrote:

JRS: In article <BD**************************@virgin.net>, dated Mon, 4
Oct 2004 22:09:40, seen in news:comp.lang.javascript, Philip Ronan
<ph***********@virgin.net> posted :

On 4/10/04 9:59 pm, TomatoeMan wrote:

I'm using the following script on my web site. I have done this in
order to keep web spider programs from harvesting my email address.

I want to have the "Subject" line filled in also.

Does anyone know how I can do that?
Basically you need to form a link with an href that looks like this:

mailto:[e-mail]?subject=This%20is%20the%20 subject
(Note: you have to use "%20" instead of spaces in the subject line)

This question, too, should be a <FAQENTRY>, to point out that
mailto:... can only work on systems with an appropriately-configured
browser-mailer interface (and that not all of those can do Subject).

Really? Again I implore, which lame brain browser-mailer interfaces fail
at this task?
Moreover, the person who wants to send mail is not necessarily the
person who "owns" the browser.
What does that mean? Is not the person who wants to send mail the person
who just clicked the mailto link? If not then who is that person?!?
Therefore, there should always be a means of giving the E-mail address
independently of mailto:.
I disagree.
One should never say that mailto: does not work; for many users, it
demonstrably does work.

For all users it should work as it is part of the standard, no? For any
user which it doesn't work then they are using non-standard compliant
software, no?
--
There cannot be a crisis today; my schedule is already full.

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <yc********************@comcast.com>, dated Tue, 5 Oct
2004 18:14:04, seen in news:comp.lang.javascript, Randy Webb
<Hi************@aol.com> posted :

Dr John Stockton wrote:

<--snip-->

One should never say that mailto: does not work; for many users, it
demonstrably does work.
I don't recall reading very many posts where it was said that mailto:
does not work,

I recall seeing enough to justify the warning.
but I have read many many posts where it was said that it
was unreliable, since it is unreliable in a web environment.

Agreed.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links;
some Astro stuff via astro.htm, gravity0.htm; quotes.htm; pascal.htm; &c, &c.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <22**************************@msgid.meganewsserver s.com

, dated Tue, 5 Oct 2004 17:37:19, seen in news:comp.lang.javascript, Andrew DeFaria <An****@DeFaria.com> posted :

Don't post HTML or multipart - see FAQ 2.3.
Dr John Stockton wrote:

This question, too, should be a <FAQENTRY>, to point out that
mailto:... can only work on systems with an
appropriately-configured browser-mailer interface (and that not
all of those can do Subject).

Really? Again I implore, which lame brain browser-mailer interfaces
fail at this task?

Any where the browser and mailer have not been configured to interact,
or whose interaction has been de-configured. I do not want my browser
to interact with my mail system, except by a trusted mechanism, which
means one independent of MS. My browser does not know my E-mail
address; my mail/news system is from a different, trusted supplier who
is reliably security-conscious; therefore I allow mailto: to start, but
of course not send, E-mail.

Moreover, the person who wants to send mail is not necessarily
the person who "owns" the browser.

What does that mean? Is not the person who wants to send mail the
person who just clicked the mailto link? If not then who is that
person?!?

Who knows? it is the person holding the mouse. The computer may belong
to someone else entirely; a family member, a friend, the Public Library,
the school. It does not necessarily know the E-mail address of the
putative sender; its owner is not necessarily willing to provide mail-
sending to the current user. And the current user may want to send mail
to the web page owner, but not from his current location.

Therefore, there should always be a means of giving the E-mail
address independently of mailto:.

I disagree.

You have not successfully applied adequate thought and understanding to
the matter.

One should never say that mailto: does not work; for many users,
it demonstrably does work.

For all users it should work as it is part of the standard, no? For
any user which it doesn't work then they are using non-standard
compliant software, no?

Yhnsaatauttm.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 IE 4 ©
<URL:http://www.jibbering.com/faq/> JL/RC: FAQ of news:comp.lang.javascript
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-index.htm> jscr maths, dates, sources.
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/jscr/&c, FAQ items, links.

[Randy Webb]

Andrew DeFaria wrote:

Dr John Stockton wrote:

<--snip-->

This question, too, should be a <FAQENTRY>, to point out that
mailto:... can only work on systems with an appropriately-configured
browser-mailer interface (and that not all of those can do Subject).

Really? Again I implore, which lame brain browser-mailer interfaces fail
at this task?

See my other reply to you.

Moreover, the person who wants to send mail is not necessarily the
person who "owns" the browser.

What does that mean? Is not the person who wants to send mail the person
who just clicked the mailto link? If not then who is that person?!?

You are confusing the user with the "owner" of the browser. Go in an
Internet Cafe, click a mailto:, who owns the computer/browser?

Therefore, there should always be a means of giving the E-mail address
independently of mailto:.

I disagree.

One should never say that mailto: does not work; for many users, it
demonstrably does work.

For all users it should work as it is part of the standard, no? For any
user which it doesn't work then they are using non-standard compliant
software, no?

Can you quote that "standard"?

And, can you give a list of "standard compliant software"? I have 7
browsers, mailto: does not work in a single one. Which one isnt
standards compliant?

--
Randy
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq

[Andrew DeFaria]

Dr John Stockton wrote:

JRS: In article <22**************************@msgid.meganewsserver s.com

, dated Tue, 5 Oct 2004 17:37:19, seen in news:comp.lang.javascript,
Andrew DeFaria <An****@DeFaria.com> posted :

Don't post HTML or multipart - see FAQ 2.3.

Ah, no. End of discussion.

Dr John Stockton wrote:

This question, too, should be a <FAQENTRY>, to point out that
mailto:... can only work on systems with an
appropriately-configured browser-mailer interface (and that not
all of those can do Subject).

Really? Again I implore, which lame brain browser-mailer interfaces
fail at this task?

Any where the browser and mailer have not been configured to interact,
or whose interaction has been de-configured.

Every email client I've seen comes configured to handle mailto links.
I do not want my browser to interact with my mail system, except by a
trusted mechanism, which means one independent of MS.
Then get one that is independent of MS. Try Thunderbird. Switch to
Linux. Otherwise you are explicitly saying you don't want mailto links
to work. Fine. Then they won't for you.
My browser does not know my E-mail address;
So?
my mail/news system is from a different, trusted supplier who is
reliably security-conscious; therefore I allow mailto: to start, but
of course not send, E-mail.

That's all a mailto link does anyway!

Moreover, the person who wants to send mail is not necessarily the
person who "owns" the browser.

What does that mean? Is not the person who wants to send mail the
person who just clicked the mailto link? If not then who is that
person?!?

Who knows? it is the person holding the mouse. The computer may belong
to someone else entirely; a family member, a friend, the Public
Library, the school. It does not necessarily know the E-mail address
of the putative sender; its owner is not necessarily willing to
provide mail-sending to the current user. And the current user may
want to send mail to the web page owner, but not from his current
location.

Then mailto functionality is not for you I guess. But it's better than
form based email by far IMHO.

Therefore, there should always be a means of giving the E-mail
address independently of mailto:.

I disagree.

You have not successfully applied adequate thought and understanding
to the matter.

Funny I was gonna say the same thing about you!

One should never say that mailto: does not work; for many users,
it demonstrably does work.

For all users it should work as it is part of the standard, no? For
any user which it doesn't work then they are using non-standard
compliant software, no?

Yhnsaatauttm.

Whatever dude...
--
If one synchronized swimmer drowns, do the rest have to drown too?

[Andrew DeFaria]

Randy Webb wrote:

Really? Again I implore, which lame brain browser-mailer interfaces
fail at this task?
See my other reply to you.

Yeah and see my reply to you. Works great for me.

Moreover, the person who wants to send mail is not necessarily the
person who "owns" the browser.

What does that mean? Is not the person who wants to send mail the
person who just clicked the mailto link? If not then who is that
person?!?

You are confusing the user with the "owner" of the browser. Go in an
Internet Cafe, click a mailto:, who owns the computer/browser?

I'd believe the owner would be the Internet Cafe owner, no? I would
suspect that the email client would pop up, probably incorrectly
configured. Configure it!

One should never say that mailto: does not work; for many users, it
demonstrably does work.

For all users it should work as it is part of the standard, no? For
any user which it doesn't work then they are using non-standard
compliant software, no?

Can you quote that "standard"?

Sure: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2368.html
And, can you give a list of "standard compliant software"?
The list would include all software that comply with the standard in
question.
I have 7 browsers, mailto: does not work in a single one. Which one
isnt standards compliant?

Again, sorry it doesn't work in any of your browsers. I use some of the
same browsers and they all work just fine for me. I guess the real
question is why isn't it working for you? I guess I'll ask the standard
question that I do of all people who fail to give details about their
problem: What was the first indication that you had that it failed? ;-)
--
A mainframe: The biggest PC peripheral available.

[Michael Winter]

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 14:55:29 -0700, Andrew DeFaria <An****@DeFaria.com>
wrote:

Randy Webb wrote:

[snip]

You are confusing the user with the "owner" of the browser. Go in an
Internet Cafe, click a mailto:, who owns the computer/browser?

I'd believe the owner would be the Internet Cafe owner, no? I would
suspect that the email client would pop up, probably incorrectly
configured. Configure it!

And how do you propose that that is done? Create an account for every
single person that uses the service? Not likely.

Either you are unable to understand the intrinsic unreliability of the
mailto: protocol, or you are simply unwilling. Either way, stop wasting
our time. Do you have nothing better to do than troll this group?

[snip]

Can you quote that "standard"?

Sure: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2368.html

That's an RFC, not a standard. If you actually did as instructed and read
STD 1 (currently RFC 3700, I believe), you would see that RFC 2368 is
nothing more than a proposed standard; the first stage of standardisation.
The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) do not recommend that
proposed standards are implemented as they may change before reaching
maturity.

To me, it suggests something quite significant when a Standards Track RFC
has remained at the proposal stage for over six years.

[snip]

Mike

--
Michael Winter
Replace ".invalid" with ".uk" to reply by e-mail.

[Michael Winter]

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 14:45:55 -0700, Andrew DeFaria <An****@DeFaria.com>
wrote:

Dr John Stockton wrote:

[snip]

Don't post HTML or multipart - see FAQ 2.3.

Ah, no. End of discussion.

Umm, yes. This is a text-only newsgroup.

[snip]

Mike

--
Michael Winter
Replace ".invalid" with ".uk" to reply by e-mail.

[Andrew Thompson]

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 09:26:42 GMT, Michael Winter wrote:

Umm, yes. This is a text-only newsgroup.

Heck yes. My ISP's news server does it for me
(strips attachments), automatically and for free. :-)

--
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

[Michael Winter]

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 10:03:45 GMT, Andrew Thompson <Se********@www.invalid>
wrote:

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 09:26:42 GMT, Michael Winter wrote:

Umm, yes. This is a text-only newsgroup.

Heck yes. My ISP's news server does it for me
(strips attachments), automatically and for free. :-)

My ISP provides two News servers - one is for binaries, the other is for
text. Guess which one I use.

Mike

--
Michael Winter
Replace ".invalid" with ".uk" to reply by e-mail.

[Andrew Thompson]

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 10:28:39 GMT, Michael Winter wrote:

My ISP provides two News servers - one is for binaries, the other is for
text. Guess which one I use.

Do I get a ( attach \ \ ments ) T-shirt if I get it right?

...that above is intended to be one of those 'red circle
with a diagonal line crossing out word' thingy symbols,
...what is it? Oh, yeah ..NOT.

Or mebe that should be a plain ol' ( detachments ) ;-)

[Michael Winter]

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 12:30:27 GMT, Andrew Thompson <Se********@www.invalid>
wrote:

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 10:28:39 GMT, Michael Winter wrote:

My ISP provides two News servers - one is for binaries, the other is
for text. Guess which one I use.

Do I get a ( attach \ \ ments ) T-shirt if I get it right?

Hehe :P

[snip]

Mike

--
Michael Winter
Replace ".invalid" with ".uk" to reply by e-mail.

[Andrew DeFaria]

Michael Winter wrote:

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 14:55:29 -0700, Andrew DeFaria
<An****@DeFaria.com> wrote:

Randy Webb wrote:
[snip]

You are confusing the user with the "owner" of the browser. Go in
an Internet Cafe, click a mailto:, who owns the computer/browser?

I'd believe the owner would be the Internet Cafe owner, no? I would
suspect that the email client would pop up, probably incorrectly
configured. Configure it!

And how do you propose that that is done? Create an account for every
single person that uses the service? Not likely.

Did I suggest that the internet cafe owner configure it? No. I was at an
internet cafe once in a foreign land. You're right, it came up not
configured for me (I didn't necessarily click a mailto link though).
What did I do? (Horrors). I configured it for myself and sent my email.
No big deal!
Either you are unable to understand the intrinsic unreliability of
the mailto: protocol, or you are simply unwilling. Either way, stop
wasting our time. Do you have nothing better to do than troll this
group?

I'm not trolling - I'm simply expressing my opinion on this - just like
you. Sorry you seem to have so much of a problem with that!

Can you quote that "standard"?

Sure: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2368.html

That's an RFC, not a standard. If you actually did as instructed and
read STD 1 (currently RFC 3700, I believe), you would see that RFC
2368 is nothing more than a proposed standard; the first stage of
standardisation. The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) do
not recommend that proposed standards are implemented as they may
change before reaching maturity.

There are many RFC's that do not reach maturity and yet are referred to
as standards. The good thing about standards are that there are so many
to choose from!
--
Some people say "life is short". What?? Life is the longest damn thing
anyone ever does!! What can you do that's longer?

[Andrew DeFaria]

Michael Winter wrote:

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 14:45:55 -0700, Andrew DeFaria
<An****@DeFaria.com> wrote:

Dr John Stockton wrote:

[snip]

Don't post HTML or multipart - see FAQ 2.3.

Ah, no. End of discussion.

Umm, yes. This is a text-only newsgroup.

Ah, no. Like I said - end of discussion. If you wish to discuss this
issue then you can discuss it amongst yourselves. I have no interest in
debating this with you
--
I went to a general store, but they wouldn't let me buy anything specific.

[Michael Winter]

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 09:13:59 -0700, Andrew DeFaria <An****@DeFaria.com>
wrote:

[snip]

Did I suggest that the internet cafe owner configure it? No. I was at an
internet cafe once in a foreign land. You're right, it came up not
configured for me (I didn't necessarily click a mailto link though).
What did I do? (Horrors). I configured it for myself and sent my email.
No big deal!

And if customers in other places aren't given permission to do that? This
isn't about what you can do. This is about the reliability of a protocol
that obviously fails in some situations where it is beyond the user's
ability to correct.

[MW:]

Either you are unable to understand the intrinsic unreliability of the
mailto: protocol, or you are simply unwilling. Either way, stop wasting
our time. Do you have nothing better to do than troll this group?

I'm not trolling - I'm simply expressing my opinion on this - just like
you. Sorry you seem to have so much of a problem with that!

The problem that I have is that you're missing the point, seemingly on
purpose. The argument as presented is that mailto: is not reliable on all
configurations. Therefore, as the only form of feedback on websites, or
other similar uses, it is not appropriate.

I don't think that anyone is suggesting that form mail should only ever be
used in such situations, that is a mailto: link can be provided, but as
form mail is more reliable it should be the first choice. As free public
services are provided, there is no reason why this cannot be the case.

At one point in a different thread, you seemed to be under the impression
that we're talking about an e-mail conversation, in which form mail is
obviously unsuitable. However, no-one else is approaching it from that
position. It is this deviation from what seems a straight-forward subject
that I object to.

[snip]

Mike

--
Michael Winter
Replace ".invalid" with ".uk" to reply by e-mail.

[Andrew DeFaria]

Michael Winter wrote:

Did I suggest that the internet cafe owner configure it? No. I was at
an internet cafe once in a foreign land. You're right, it came up
not configured for me (I didn't necessarily click a mailto link
though). What did I do? (Horrors). I configured it for myself and
sent my email. No big deal!
And if customers in other places aren't given permission to do that?

Find a better Internet Cafe! ;-)
The problem that I have is that you're missing the point, seemingly
on purpose. The argument as presented is that mailto: is not reliable
on all configurations. Therefore, as the only form of feedback on
websites, or other similar uses, it is not appropriate.

I don't think that anyone is suggesting that form mail should only
ever be used in such situations, that is a mailto: link can be
provided, but as form mail is more reliable it should be the first
choice. As free public services are provided, there is no reason why
this cannot be the case.
I'd be happy if there were always an mailto link as an alternative.
Companies hide behind email forms, force fitting you into little
categories and additional hassles when the purpose of your communication
quite simply just does not fit the form. Often they never respond to
your email anyway (and regardless if mailto is more or less reliable
than web form based email, communication is a two way street and if they
don't respond then even web based form email is as "reliable" as a mis
configured client and a mailto tag!) Additionally form mail is extremely
limited and often cumbersome to use. And it's not like I have not had
many times when form mail simple does not work - anything from server
errors to browser errors to whatever.
At one point in a different thread, you seemed to be under the
impression that we're talking about an e-mail conversation, in which
form mail is obviously unsuitable. However, no-one else is
approaching it from that position. It is this deviation from what
seems a straight-forward subject that I object to.

I've only ever said that mailto links were good for email conversations!
Obviously mailto links are not designed to be used in web form data
gathering application.

--
5 days a week my body is a temple. The other two, it's an amusement park.