Re: nesting JS in echo's

Seni Seven wrote:
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in comp.lang.php:

Seni Seven wrote:
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in comp.lang.php:

Seni Seven wrote:
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in comp.lang.php:

Seni Seven wrote:
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in comp.lang.php:

Seni Seven wrote:
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in comp.lang.php:

Seni Seven wrote:
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
comp.lang.php:

Request-1 wrote:
"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:gf2t4m$inr$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Request-1 wrote:
hi folks,

html coder here, new and terrified * of php!!
aaaaaa!

i'm trying to bury a JS script to rotate a photo, in a
page i converted from html to php.
the conversion went well, it was to use a php session
cookie to stop the repeating of an embedded video file on
a per session basis; i amended the php code to display a
still pic if the session cookie value was nil.

worked fine.

thought I'd try integrating a tested and true JS image
random rotator script into the echo command, but the
problem was the syntax of the single quotes and double
quotes needed in the doc.write and variable sequences in
the JS.

i tried escaping the double quotes (my echo used double
quotes), but to no avail.

here's the JS CODE i use in the tail end of my PHP. "picnumber" is the variable holding the randomly assigned
number that chooses the picture.

any help much appreciated..


++++++++++++++++

{ echo "

<script language='JavaScript1.2'>
<!-- begin
document.write(\"'<img src='images/swap/'+ picnumber
+ '.jpg'>\"); // end -->
</script>
"; }

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

thanks
You have an extra single quote before <img ...
Hi Jerry,

the single quote is actually necessary in JS when you're
using document.write to add strings in series (is it called
"concatenating" or something?). so the <img src...>
statement was broken down into 3 seperate stings to be
re-joined - all within the double-quote nested doc.write
stmt. my mistake was to leave the image path in single
quotes; instead I tried "escaped double quotes" to complete
the image path, like so,

{ echo "<script language='JavaScript1.2'>\n";
echo "<!-- begin \n";
echo "document.write('<img src=\"images/swap/' +
picnumber +'.jpg\" width=\"320\" height=\"240\" border=\"0\" alt=\"Fitness
Training Image\">');\n";
echo "// end -->\n";
echo "</script>"; }


but no avail. still no pic shows up.

anyway. i get really confused with all the nested stuff
and single-double quotes. i may try that "heredoc" thing
that Thomas suggested. I'll need a couple of beers first. Friday night on Javascript? Bad!


BTW - you don't need quotes around numeric values like your
width, height and border. Only non-numeric data.
Are you talking about generating strict (X)HTML? Quotes must
be on all element attributes in that case, regardless of
attribute value type.


1. There is no indication this is XHTML.
2. You shouldn't use XHTML for web pages - it's not well
supported by some browser, not the least being IE 6 and 7.
Actually, many can and do use XHTML for web pages.

I looked at this page successfully using IE7. The web document
was written by NONE OTHER THAN BY THE W3 Consortium itself, the
standards- setting (they use the term "recommendations"
modestly instead of "standards") in strict XHTML. Go figure.

Sure, you CAN make pages which will cater to the different
browsers idiosyncrasies, but why? Where is the need for xhtml?

There are various documents that can be googled that specify
solutions wo using XHTML for broken browsers like Internet
Explorer, such as using an XML style*** also to get around
problems with showing XHTML in standards-violating,
never-get-it-right HTTP clients like Internet Explorer. This
is not rocket science.

HTML does NOT require quotes on numeric attributes.
Actually the HTML 4 recommendation does not assert in any way
whatsoever that quotes can be omitted for attributes that have
numeric values. It does allow for their omission, but
recommends they always be used. There is no indication about
whether this recommendation applies to the various levels of
HTML: strict, transitional, frameset.

http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/intro/sgmltut.html#attributes

Which backs up my claim that HTML does NOT require quotes on
numeric attributes.
If you really want to split hairs, as you apparently want to do,
the loosest usage of HTML doesn't require quotes on any attribute
values except in the very few circumstances that your determined
attempts to confuse the browser do not achieve the rendering you
desire.

Here is one individual's take on SCRUPULOUSLY quoting all
attribute values in HTML, which MUST be quoted in every case in
XHTML:

http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/qattr.html

He is or was a regular (long-time) and, I believe, respected
contributer to the HTML usage newsgroups.
So? That's one person's opinion. Worth no more or less than
anyone else's opinion.
Actually, the HTML standards keepers RECOMMEND (though they don't
REQUIRE) you to quote attribute values----ALL OF THEM.

But then you have already established that you are a
hair-splitter.

Perhaps you'd like to disparage the "opinions" of the HTML
standards keepers too?

Search enough and you can find an opinion you agree with
anywhere on the internet.
Precisely right!

But then I am not so desperate to support my claims on the sole
"opinion" of one kook with a web page against the 99,999 opinions
of people who impress me with reason and logic and a certain
level of erudition, some of whom actually sit on
standards-setting committees like the one that promulgates the
HTML specification.

Oh my!

A new word of the day:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/consensus
For starters:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer

"Trident layout engine, fully supports HTML 4.01, CSS Level 1, XML
1.0 and DOM Level 1, with minor implementation gaps. It partially
supports CSS Level 2 and DOM Level 2, with major implementation
gaps and conformance issues. Full conformance to the CSS 2.1
specification is on the agenda for the final Internet Explorer 8
release.[32] It has no support for XHTML, though it can render
XHTML documents authored with HTML compatibility principles and
served with a text/html MIME-type."

And tens of thousands of similar pages.
What part of that XHTML page that I gave in the response (inserted
here for the readers: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/xhtml-faq) did
not conform to the XHTML specification???

Tricking broken browsers---in HTTP response headers, in meta
elements, etc.----that don't comply with either the HTML or XHTML
specification--- notwithstanding your hilarious citation of a
Wikipedia article whose content is known to be notoriously
inaccurate---is not the fault of page developers. Perhaps instead
of recommending that page developers shy away from using XHTML in
STARK CONTRAST to the HTML specification writers URGING you to do
so, you should be telling them to include alternately served
documents with the simple statement urging their readers to stop
using broken browsers. Many developers do JUST that, just as many
developers that serve script-dependent content tell their readers
that the scientific/chemistry calculator they want to use won't
work unless they enable their browser to use scripts.

And in finishing:

Best practices are that attribute values in HTML---all of
them---are quoted, as RECOMMENDED by those who promulgated the HTML
specificiation. To insist on deviating from best practices is
altogether foolish.
If you find Wikipedia to be inaccurate, you are free to edit it and correct the inaccuracies. That's what it's all about. If you fail
to do that, that's your problem.

But you also haven't identified exactly WHAT is inaccurate about
this article - only made a generic statement. Specifically WHAT is inaccurate, and how are you going to correct it?

And I didn't say whether something was recommended or not. I said
that quotes were not REQUIRED around numeric values. And they are
not.

Pages validate quite well with W3C's only HTML validator when
numbers are not in quotes. It doesn't even give a warning.
Yeah, Transitional HTML is forgiving that way.

Set the validator for Strict HTML, and pretty much all of the
attributes you would want to use with numeric values are
disallowed---that is, generate an error on the validator. You are
supposed to be using a styling convention (CSS).

Like "width" and "height" in <img> tags?

Set the validator to use the HTML Tidy option to----in its
words---CLEAN UP your HTML, and lo and behold, all your unquoted
attribute values--- every one of them---get quoted, and your doctype
is set to Transitional to allow the otherwise disallowed attributes
in Strict HTML.

What do you think that W3 is saying to the HTML page writer when it "cleans up" the page this way?

I said nothing about transitional HTML. The same is true for strict
HTML.

This has NOTHING to do with whether the attributes are allowed or not (in fact, all of the ones I use ARE valid - because I only write
strict HTML). And CSS is not for everything.

Sure, it the Tidy option adds quotes. But that does not mean they are
required. They are not - as you have said yourself.

As to what it does when it "cleans up the page" - that's its option. But either way is still valid - as you have said yourself, quotes are
a recommendation - not a requirement. They are only required on non-numeric values.

Required on non-numeric values?

The following valid HTML document gives two unquoted values for a paragraph element and its values are non-numeric.

So much for requiring any compliance to recommendations (standards).


<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd";>
<html>
<head>
<title>HTML pages really have should titles</title>
</head>
<body>

<p id=paragraph-1 class=aTypicalParagraph>
This paragraph specifies unquoted values for its attributes.

</body>
</html>




This is transitional, not strict.

But we have gotten way off of PHP. This is more suitable for alt.html. I'm not going to carry this on any longer.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
==================
.