How to submit form via PHP

On Sat, 2008-09-27 at 21:37 -0700, Waynn Lue wrote:
> >No it doesn't... without an action statement...
>
> Sorry to drag up an old thread, but I just saw this. Is that true of
> all browsers? I'm wondering because I just coded a site to use this
> behavior, then I saw that the html specification says the action
> attribute is required.
>
> Thanks,
> Waynn
>
> On 8/15/08, Robert Cummings <robert@interjinn.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-08-15 at 13:30 -0500, Jay Blanchard wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >> Hello. I'm pretty noob in PHP and would like to know how can I submit
> >> some HTML form got via file_get_contents(URL). For example:
> >>
> >> <form name="someform" method="post">
> >> <input type="submit">
> >> </form>
> >>
> >> so how can I submit 'someform' form.
> >>
> >> Thanks in advance for any suggestions.
> >> [/snip]
> >>
> >> Click 'Submit'
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Your form tag needs an action statement
> >
> > No it doesn't... without an action statement it will submit to the same
> > URL in which it was presented.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Rob.
> > --
> > http://www.interjinn.com
> > Application and Templating Framework for PHP
> >
> >
> > --
> > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
> >
> >
>
Without the action attribute, the form submits to itself, i.e. a form on
contact.php submits to contact.php without an action attribute being
specified.


Ash
www.ashleysheridan.co.uk

Ashley Sheridan wrote:

> Without the action attribute, the form submits to itself, i.e. a form
> on contact.php submits to contact.php without an action attribute
> being specified.

Yes, not specifying the action attribute is the same as having an empty
action attribute. I don't know if all browsers interpret it that way,
but it does seem a reasonable assumption.


/Per Jessen, Zürich

Not according to this:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/interac...ml#adef-action

The only defined behaviour is when you specify a URI.

Thank you,
Micah Gersten
onShore Networks
Internal Developer
http://www.onshore.com



Richard Lynch wrote:
> Actually, I believe action="" submitting to the same URL is *documented* HTTP spec behavior.
>
> I welcome correction/confirmation if somebody wants to wade through the docs again...
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dotan Cohen [mailto:dotancohen@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2008 4:13 AM
>> To: php-general@lists.php.net
>> Subject: Re: [php] How to submit form via PHP
>>
>> 2008/9/28 Ashley Sheridan <ash@ashleysheridan.co.uk>:
>>
>>>> Sorry to drag up an old thread, but I just saw this. Is that true of
>>>> all browsers? I'm wondering because I just coded a site to use this
>>>> behavior, then I saw that the html specification says the action
>>>> attribute is required.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Without the action attribute, the form submits to itself, i.e. a form
>>>
>> on
>>
>>> contact.php submits to contact.php without an action attribute being
>>> specified.
>>>
>>>
>> If it's undocumented then I would not rely upon it. How much trouble
>> did we have in the early 00's because of sites that were coded for the
>> undocumented 'features' of specific browsers five years prior?
>> Additionally, if you cannot test all the varied platforms (PC,
>> cellphones, iPhone, PS3, browsers for the disabled) then you should
>> not rely on undocumented behaviour.
>>
>> Dotan Cohen
>>
>> http://what-is-what.com
>> http://gibberish.co.il
>> ×�-ב-×’-ד-×”-ו-×–-×—-ט-×™-ך-×›-ל-×�-מ-ן-×*-ס-×¢-×£-פ-×¥-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת
>>
>> ä-ö-ü-ß-Ä-Ö-Ü
>>
>
> __________________________________________________ _____
>
> The information in this email or in any file attached
> hereto is intended only for the personal and confiden-
> tial use of the individual or entity to which it is
> addressed and may contain information that is propri-
> etary and confidential. If you are not the intended
> recipient of this message you are hereby notified that
> any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of
> this message is strictly prohibited. This communica-
> tion is for information purposes only and should not
> be regarded as an offer to sell or as a solicitation
> of an offer to buy any financial product. Email trans-
> mission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-
> free. P6070214
>

Micah Gersten a écrit :
> Not according to this:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/interac...ml#adef-action
>
> The only defined behaviour is when you specify a URI.

The empty string into an HTML document is a valid relative URI ;)
According the same document gave (just follow the references ;) ).

--
Mickaël Wolff aka Lupus Michaelis
http://lupusmic.org

On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 23:56 +0200, Lupus Michaelis wrote:
> Micah Gersten a écrit :
> > Not according to this:
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/interac...ml#adef-action
> >
> > The only defined behaviour is when you specify a URI.
>
> The empty string into an HTML document is a valid relative URI ;)
> According the same document gave (just follow the references ;) ).
>
> --
> Mickaël Wolff aka Lupus Michaelis
> http://lupusmic.org
>
Do you have a reference for that, because I don't see it...


Ash
www.ashleysheridan.co.uk

On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 23:40 +0100, Ashley Sheridan wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 23:56 +0200, Lupus Michaelis wrote:
> > Micah Gersten a écrit :
> > > Not according to this:
> > > http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/interac...ml#adef-action
> > >
> > > The only defined behaviour is when you specify a URI.
> >
> > The empty string into an HTML document is a valid relative URI ;)
> > According the same document gave (just follow the references ;) ).
> >
> > --
> > Mickaël Wolff aka Lupus Michaelis
> > http://lupusmic.org
> >
> Do you have a reference for that, because I don't see it...
>
>
> Ash
> www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
>
>
Sorry, my bad, I see it!


Ash
www.ashleysheridan.co.uk

Ashley Sheridan a écrit :

From the link you gave, we stick on
<http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/types.html#type-uri>, so it references an
IETF RFC <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1808.txt> that describes what is an
URI.

The fourth section describes how we have to determine the resolution
of an URI. The point that are in our scope is the next I quote :

«
a) If the embedded URL is entirely empty, it inherits the
entire base URL (i.e., is set equal to the base URL)
and we are done.
»

If you have any doubt, just enjoy reading the full document ;)

But for me, it is quite clear that an empty string is a valid URI
*into* a document served by HTTP.

--
Mickaël Wolff aka Lupus Michaelis
http://lupusmic.org

On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 11:33:41 -0500, Richard Lynch wrote:

> Actually, I believe action="" submitting to the same URL is *documented* HTTP spec behavior.
>
> I welcome correction/confirmation if somebody wants to wade through the docs again...

HTML 4.01 says:

action = uri [CT]
This attribute specifies a form processing agent. User agent
behavior for a value other than an HTTP URI is undefined.

The "uri" is a reference to RFC 2396, which says:

4.2. Same-document References

A URI reference that does not contain a URI is a reference to the
current document. In other words, an empty URI reference within a
document is interpreted as a reference to the start of that document,

[For some reason, the syntax does not allow empty URI
references. However, RFC 2396 has been obsoleted by
RFC 3986 which /does/ allow empty URI references.]

[And yes, the HTML spec should probably refer to URI
*references* rather than URIs...]

On the other hand, I seem to recall that it has been
rumoured that some have claimed that browser support
for empty action attribute is (or was) patchy.
I don't know.


/Nisse

Lupus Michaelis wrote:
> Ashley Sheridan a écrit :
>
> From the link you gave, we stick on
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/types.html#type-uri>, so it references an
> IETF RFC <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1808.txt> that describes what is an
> URI.
>
> The fourth section describes how we have to determine the resolution
> of an URI. The point that are in our scope is the next I quote :
>
> «
> a) If the embedded URL is entirely empty, it inherits the
> entire base URL (i.e., is set equal to the base URL)
> and we are done.
> »
>
> If you have any doubt, just enjoy reading the full document ;)
>
> But for me, it is quite clear that an empty string is a valid URI
> *into* a document served by HTTP.
>

I almost got used to the "schreefing" and now the "a écriting"!

-Shawn

Hm, it specifies base though. Does that mean the full query string
won't be guaranteed to be passed along?



On 9/29/08, Lupus Michaelis <mickael+php@lupusmic.org> wrote:
> Ashley Sheridan a écrit :
>
> From the link you gave, we stick on
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/types.html#type-uri>, so it references an
> IETF RFC <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1808.txt> that describes what is an
> URI.
>
> The fourth section describes how we have to determine the resolution
> of an URI. The point that are in our scope is the next I quote :
>
> «
> a) If the embedded URL is entirely empty, it inherits the
> entire base URL (i.e., is set equal to the base URL)
> and we are done.
> »
>
> If you have any doubt, just enjoy reading the full document ;)
>
> But for me, it is quite clear that an empty string is a valid URI
> *into* a document served by HTTP.
>
> --
> Mickaël Wolff aka Lupus Michaelis
> http://lupusmic.org
>
> --
> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>