Double click

This has probably been asked 100's of times, but I couldn't find anything on
it.

Is there a small script of some sort, that would disable the ability to
double click a submit button>?

Re: Double click

Jeff wrote on 12 jun 2005 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.db:

> This has probably been asked 100's of times, but I couldn't find
> anything on it.
>
> Is there a small script of some sort, that would disable the ability
> to double click a submit button>?

ASP runs serverside and does know noting about clicking.

Databases under ASP know even less.

Please ask a apopriate clientside NG.

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Replace all crosses with dots in my emailaddress)

Re: Double click

Thanks for your NOT SO FRIENDLY response. I thought, since the form is
written with asp, and it submits to an asp page, and the results are
displayed with asp, that this was the place to ask. I didn't see a NG labled
submit buttons.
I know that most in here, if there was a solution, would give it. Therefore,
I do not accept your response, and will wait patiently to see if someone can
help me.

"Evertjan." wrote in message
news:Xns9673F29B1D72Eeejj99@194.109.133.242...
> Jeff wrote on 12 jun 2005 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.db:
>
>> This has probably been asked 100's of times, but I couldn't find
>> anything on it.
>>
>> Is there a small script of some sort, that would disable the ability
>> to double click a submit button>?
>
> ASP runs serverside and does know noting about clicking.
>
> Databases under ASP know even less.
>
> Please ask a apopriate clientside NG.
>
> --
> Evertjan.
> The Netherlands.
> (Replace all crosses with dots in my emailaddress)
>

Re: Double click

Jeff wrote on 13 jun 2005 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.db:
> "Evertjan." wrote in message
>> Jeff wrote on 12 jun 2005 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.db:
>>
>>> This has probably been asked 100's of times, but I couldn't find
>>> anything on it.
>>>
>>> Is there a small script of some sort, that would disable the ability
>>> to double click a submit button>?
>>
>> ASP runs serverside and does know noting about clicking.
>>
>> Databases under ASP know even less.
>>
>> Please ask a apopriate clientside NG.
>>
> Thanks for your NOT SO FRIENDLY response.

I said please, Jeff.

How friendly should one be, when you ask in the wrong NG.
Even genuine ASP questions not related to databases are discouraged here.

This is not a payed helpdesk.

Usenet would not function if one could expect off topic questions
answered in any dedicated NG, so effectively negating the concept of such
dedication. Clientside NGs where you can put your Q abound.

> I thought, since the form is written with asp,

What form? You did not hint at one. Nor did you supply any code.

Forms are never written in ASP,
because ASP is a platform, not a computer language.

> and it submits to an asp page, and the results are
> displayed with asp, that this was the place to ask. I didn't see a NG
> labled submit buttons.

But I told you ASP does not know about clicking, because that happens
clientside. So there must be clientside code, HTML and some scripting.

> I know that most in here, if there was a solution, would give it.

There is no solution within ASP about clicking manipulation,
because clicking happens clientside.

Furthermore even if it was an ASP issue, which it is not,
it certainly also is not a database issue.

> Therefore, I do not accept your response, and will wait patiently to
> see if someone can help me.

You are welcome to wait patiently, not being my patient.

In this NG, according to it's charter and netiquette,
you better programme a timeOut().

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Replace all crosses with dots in my emailaddress)

Re: Double click

So, if I have an ASP page, and want to know how to crop one of the page's
images in PhotoShop, I should post here?

Bob Lehmann

"Jeff" wrote in message
news:KIWdnT2ZLriTKzHfRVn-sw@adelphia.com...
> Thanks for your NOT SO FRIENDLY response. I thought, since the form is
> written with asp, and it submits to an asp page, and the results are
> displayed with asp, that this was the place to ask. I didn't see a NG
labled
> submit buttons.
> I know that most in here, if there was a solution, would give it.
Therefore,
> I do not accept your response, and will wait patiently to see if someone
can
> help me.
>
> "Evertjan." wrote in message
> news:Xns9673F29B1D72Eeejj99@194.109.133.242...
> > Jeff wrote on 12 jun 2005 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.db:
> >
> >> This has probably been asked 100's of times, but I couldn't find
> >> anything on it.
> >>
> >> Is there a small script of some sort, that would disable the ability
> >> to double click a submit button>?
> >
> > ASP runs serverside and does know noting about clicking.
> >
> > Databases under ASP know even less.
> >
> > Please ask a apopriate clientside NG.
> >
> > --
> > Evertjan.
> > The Netherlands.
> > (Replace all crosses with dots in my emailaddress)
> >
>
>

Re: Double click

"Jeff" wrote in message
news:KIWdnT2ZLriTKzHfRVn-sw@adelphia.com...
> Thanks for your NOT SO FRIENDLY response. I thought, since the form is
> written with asp, and it submits to an asp page, and the results are
> displayed with asp, that this was the place to ask. I didn't see a NG
> labled submit buttons.
> I know that most in here, if there was a solution, would give it.
> Therefore, I do not accept your response, and will wait patiently to see
> if someone can help me.

Don't mind him, he's just the resident know-nothing butt-head. Whatever
glimpse of programming he may have once had is now eclipsed by a bad
personality and a tendency to be wrong much of the time. (I suspect there
may be a language barrier issue as well, but his level of arrogance isn't
usually present in such cases, so the jury is still out on that score.)

I'm going to assume that by "double click" you mean double submit, where the
user clicks the submit button a second time, before the first request has
been delivered to the user's browser, but after the first request has been
received by the server.

Unfortunately there isn't a bunch you can do about this on the server side.
You might try time-stamping the requests as they come in, and discarding ant
that are received within a certain proximity, but this can be difficult to
do, depending on the processing that's involved.

There is of course the widely used "social engineering" scheme (i.e., the
'do not press this button more than once' warning) but sadly it's less than
effective.

There are some client-side remedys, such as hiding the button after it has
been clicked, but before the request has been submitted (process onclick)
but I had 7 kinds of hell trying to make that work in non-IE browsers, and
finally gave up.

You might want to try clarifying you post (particularly if my assumptions
were incorrect) and resubmitting it to
microsoft.public.inetsdk.programming.scripting.jscript. There is a definite
server-side slant to your issue, and doubly-submitted requests surely can
cause database issues, but your most effective solutions are likely to
reside on the client end.


-Mark


btw, to any of you that might care to flame me for taking a shot at that
guy, first ask yourself, "does he have a valid point?" And second, be sure
to quote back the "offensive" part because that guy likely has me
kill-filtered, and I'd hate for him to have to wonder about what was said.


> "Evertjan." wrote in message
> news:Xns9673F29B1D72Eeejj99@194.109.133.242...
>> Jeff wrote on 12 jun 2005 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.db:
>>
>>> This has probably been asked 100's of times, but I couldn't find
>>> anything on it.
>>>
>>> Is there a small script of some sort, that would disable the ability
>>> to double click a submit button>?
>>
>> ASP runs serverside and does know noting about clicking.
>>
>> Databases under ASP know even less.
>>
>> Please ask a apopriate clientside NG.
>>
>> --
>> Evertjan.
>> The Netherlands.
>> (Replace all crosses with dots in my emailaddress)
>>
>
>

Re: Double click

Gazing into my crystal ball I observed "Bob Lehmann"
writing in news:uvwKdQ6bFHA.584
@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl:

> So, if I have an ASP page, and want to know how to crop one of the page's
> images in PhotoShop, I should post here?
>
> Bob Lehmann
>

Someone in another group said that he made his logo with HTML, so why not?
;-)

--
Adrienne Boswell
http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
Please respond to the group so others can share

Re: Double click

No, your assumptions are right on. I have a form that folks use to report
matches (golf), and what is happening, is some not being careful, and
clicking twice, or clicking a mouse button that is programed for double
click.

I could time stamp, then delete, but lots of stuff happens when someone
reports. I have to go to different tables and adjust totals and a bunch of
other things. Which I have to do manually anyway. I was just hoping there
was something that could be done.

Thanks for your time, and for your response.


"Mark J. McGinty" wrote in message
news:uswJkR6bFHA.3048@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
> "Jeff" wrote in message
> news:KIWdnT2ZLriTKzHfRVn-sw@adelphia.com...
>> Thanks for your NOT SO FRIENDLY response. I thought, since the form is
>> written with asp, and it submits to an asp page, and the results are
>> displayed with asp, that this was the place to ask. I didn't see a NG
>> labled submit buttons.
>> I know that most in here, if there was a solution, would give it.
>> Therefore, I do not accept your response, and will wait patiently to see
>> if someone can help me.
>
> Don't mind him, he's just the resident know-nothing butt-head. Whatever
> glimpse of programming he may have once had is now eclipsed by a bad
> personality and a tendency to be wrong much of the time. (I suspect there
> may be a language barrier issue as well, but his level of arrogance isn't
> usually present in such cases, so the jury is still out on that score.)
>
> I'm going to assume that by "double click" you mean double submit, where
> the user clicks the submit button a second time, before the first request
> has been delivered to the user's browser, but after the first request has
> been received by the server.
>
> Unfortunately there isn't a bunch you can do about this on the server
> side. You might try time-stamping the requests as they come in, and
> discarding ant that are received within a certain proximity, but this can
> be difficult to do, depending on the processing that's involved.
>
> There is of course the widely used "social engineering" scheme (i.e., the
> 'do not press this button more than once' warning) but sadly it's less
> than effective.
>
> There are some client-side remedys, such as hiding the button after it has
> been clicked, but before the request has been submitted (process onclick)
> but I had 7 kinds of hell trying to make that work in non-IE browsers, and
> finally gave up.
>
> You might want to try clarifying you post (particularly if my assumptions
> were incorrect) and resubmitting it to
> microsoft.public.inetsdk.programming.scripting.jscript. There is a
> definite server-side slant to your issue, and doubly-submitted requests
> surely can cause database issues, but your most effective solutions are
> likely to reside on the client end.
>
>
> -Mark
>
>
> btw, to any of you that might care to flame me for taking a shot at that
> guy, first ask yourself, "does he have a valid point?" And second, be
> sure to quote back the "offensive" part because that guy likely has me
> kill-filtered, and I'd hate for him to have to wonder about what was said.
>
>
>> "Evertjan." wrote in message
>> news:Xns9673F29B1D72Eeejj99@194.109.133.242...
>>> Jeff wrote on 12 jun 2005 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.db:
>>>
>>>> This has probably been asked 100's of times, but I couldn't find
>>>> anything on it.
>>>>
>>>> Is there a small script of some sort, that would disable the ability
>>>> to double click a submit button>?
>>>
>>> ASP runs serverside and does know noting about clicking.
>>>
>>> Databases under ASP know even less.
>>>
>>> Please ask a apopriate clientside NG.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Evertjan.
>>> The Netherlands.
>>> (Replace all crosses with dots in my emailaddress)
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: Double click

"Jeff" wrote in message
news:eNidnWaWS5aEdDHfRVn-vA@adelphia.com...
> No, your assumptions are right on. I have a form that folks use to report
> matches (golf), and what is happening, is some not being careful, and
> clicking twice, or clicking a mouse button that is programed for double
> click.

If you had a way to tell before further processing that the submission was
likely a duplicate, you should be able to just discard the duplicate, and
leave the first intact. Like maybe a separate table containing just user id
and time of day (and/or maybe even some identifying facet of the match
record they're submitting.) Keep it external to the rest of your tables,
and use it only for a short historical view. The viability would depend on
what asumptions might be made as far as how close together a given user
should be able to submit an entry.

If you can pick-out the duplicates by hand, then it may be possible to
identify them programattically before they happen; that, I'd think, would be
best case... of course it would also add some overhead, but then again, so
does duplicate processing and subsequent cleanup.

A db constraint-based solution might be possible as well, but impossible to
say without knowledge of the schema.

Almost lastly, I seem to recall that the client-side problems I had with
Netscape had to do specifically with manipulating elements in other frames,
I think hiding the button worked just fine, I just couldn't show it again
when the frame I posted to completed. If the posting page is reloaded as
part of the process, that wouldn't apply.

And finally lastly, the main reason I gave up was because all that was at
stake was some server time, when clueless users submitted a lengthy search
more than once because they were impatient. (That doesn't help anything, it
just adds more load.) And I did leave the IE solution in place, with the
rationale, at least 98% of them won't be able to submit twice... Point being
that I didn't mean to imply you should give up, by mentioning the fact that
I did. :-)


-Mark


> I could time stamp, then delete, but lots of stuff happens when someone
> reports. I have to go to different tables and adjust totals and a bunch of
> other things. Which I have to do manually anyway. I was just hoping there
> was something that could be done.
>
> Thanks for your time, and for your response.
>
>
> "Mark J. McGinty" wrote in message
> news:uswJkR6bFHA.3048@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "Jeff" wrote in message
>> news:KIWdnT2ZLriTKzHfRVn-sw@adelphia.com...
>>> Thanks for your NOT SO FRIENDLY response. I thought, since the form is
>>> written with asp, and it submits to an asp page, and the results are
>>> displayed with asp, that this was the place to ask. I didn't see a NG
>>> labled submit buttons.
>>> I know that most in here, if there was a solution, would give it.
>>> Therefore, I do not accept your response, and will wait patiently to see
>>> if someone can help me.
>>
>> Don't mind him, he's just the resident know-nothing butt-head. Whatever
>> glimpse of programming he may have once had is now eclipsed by a bad
>> personality and a tendency to be wrong much of the time. (I suspect
>> there may be a language barrier issue as well, but his level of arrogance
>> isn't usually present in such cases, so the jury is still out on that
>> score.)
>>
>> I'm going to assume that by "double click" you mean double submit, where
>> the user clicks the submit button a second time, before the first request
>> has been delivered to the user's browser, but after the first request has
>> been received by the server.
>>
>> Unfortunately there isn't a bunch you can do about this on the server
>> side. You might try time-stamping the requests as they come in, and
>> discarding ant that are received within a certain proximity, but this can
>> be difficult to do, depending on the processing that's involved.
>>
>> There is of course the widely used "social engineering" scheme (i.e., the
>> 'do not press this button more than once' warning) but sadly it's less
>> than effective.
>>
>> There are some client-side remedys, such as hiding the button after it
>> has been clicked, but before the request has been submitted (process
>> onclick) but I had 7 kinds of hell trying to make that work in non-IE
>> browsers, and finally gave up.
>>
>> You might want to try clarifying you post (particularly if my assumptions
>> were incorrect) and resubmitting it to
>> microsoft.public.inetsdk.programming.scripting.jscript. There is a
>> definite server-side slant to your issue, and doubly-submitted requests
>> surely can cause database issues, but your most effective solutions are
>> likely to reside on the client end.
>>
>>
>> -Mark
>>
>>
>> btw, to any of you that might care to flame me for taking a shot at that
>> guy, first ask yourself, "does he have a valid point?" And second, be
>> sure to quote back the "offensive" part because that guy likely has me
>> kill-filtered, and I'd hate for him to have to wonder about what was
>> said.
>>
>>
>>> "Evertjan." wrote in message
>>> news:Xns9673F29B1D72Eeejj99@194.109.133.242...
>>>> Jeff wrote on 12 jun 2005 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.db:
>>>>
>>>>> This has probably been asked 100's of times, but I couldn't find
>>>>> anything on it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a small script of some sort, that would disable the ability
>>>>> to double click a submit button>?
>>>>
>>>> ASP runs serverside and does know noting about clicking.
>>>>
>>>> Databases under ASP know even less.
>>>>
>>>> Please ask a apopriate clientside NG.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Evertjan.
>>>> The Netherlands.
>>>> (Replace all crosses with dots in my emailaddress)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: Double click

Thanks for the ideas. I am gonna try a few things, using what you said, and
using some ideas I have. I would be more than happy to let you know how
things go if you want me to.
Thanks again for your time.


"Mark J. McGinty" wrote in message
news:V58re.9899$tr.3551@fed1read03...
>
> "Jeff" wrote in message
> news:eNidnWaWS5aEdDHfRVn-vA@adelphia.com...
>> No, your assumptions are right on. I have a form that folks use to report
>> matches (golf), and what is happening, is some not being careful, and
>> clicking twice, or clicking a mouse button that is programed for double
>> click.
>
> If you had a way to tell before further processing that the submission was
> likely a duplicate, you should be able to just discard the duplicate, and
> leave the first intact. Like maybe a separate table containing just user
> id and time of day (and/or maybe even some identifying facet of the match
> record they're submitting.) Keep it external to the rest of your tables,
> and use it only for a short historical view. The viability would depend
> on what asumptions might be made as far as how close together a given user
> should be able to submit an entry.
>
> If you can pick-out the duplicates by hand, then it may be possible to
> identify them programattically before they happen; that, I'd think, would
> be best case... of course it would also add some overhead, but then again,
> so does duplicate processing and subsequent cleanup.
>
> A db constraint-based solution might be possible as well, but impossible
> to say without knowledge of the schema.
>
> Almost lastly, I seem to recall that the client-side problems I had with
> Netscape had to do specifically with manipulating elements in other
> frames, I think hiding the button worked just fine, I just couldn't show
> it again when the frame I posted to completed. If the posting page is
> reloaded as part of the process, that wouldn't apply.
>
> And finally lastly, the main reason I gave up was because all that was at
> stake was some server time, when clueless users submitted a lengthy search
> more than once because they were impatient. (That doesn't help anything,
> it just adds more load.) And I did leave the IE solution in place, with
> the rationale, at least 98% of them won't be able to submit twice... Point
> being that I didn't mean to imply you should give up, by mentioning the
> fact that I did. :-)
>
>
> -Mark
>
>
>> I could time stamp, then delete, but lots of stuff happens when someone
>> reports. I have to go to different tables and adjust totals and a bunch
>> of other things. Which I have to do manually anyway. I was just hoping
>> there was something that could be done.
>>
>> Thanks for your time, and for your response.
>>
>>
>> "Mark J. McGinty" wrote in message
>> news:uswJkR6bFHA.3048@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>> "Jeff" wrote in message
>>> news:KIWdnT2ZLriTKzHfRVn-sw@adelphia.com...
>>>> Thanks for your NOT SO FRIENDLY response. I thought, since the form is
>>>> written with asp, and it submits to an asp page, and the results are
>>>> displayed with asp, that this was the place to ask. I didn't see a NG
>>>> labled submit buttons.
>>>> I know that most in here, if there was a solution, would give it.
>>>> Therefore, I do not accept your response, and will wait patiently to
>>>> see if someone can help me.
>>>
>>> Don't mind him, he's just the resident know-nothing butt-head. Whatever
>>> glimpse of programming he may have once had is now eclipsed by a bad
>>> personality and a tendency to be wrong much of the time. (I suspect
>>> there may be a language barrier issue as well, but his level of
>>> arrogance isn't usually present in such cases, so the jury is still out
>>> on that score.)
>>>
>>> I'm going to assume that by "double click" you mean double submit, where
>>> the user clicks the submit button a second time, before the first
>>> request has been delivered to the user's browser, but after the first
>>> request has been received by the server.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately there isn't a bunch you can do about this on the server
>>> side. You might try time-stamping the requests as they come in, and
>>> discarding ant that are received within a certain proximity, but this
>>> can be difficult to do, depending on the processing that's involved.
>>>
>>> There is of course the widely used "social engineering" scheme (i.e.,
>>> the 'do not press this button more than once' warning) but sadly it's
>>> less than effective.
>>>
>>> There are some client-side remedys, such as hiding the button after it
>>> has been clicked, but before the request has been submitted (process
>>> onclick) but I had 7 kinds of hell trying to make that work in non-IE
>>> browsers, and finally gave up.
>>>
>>> You might want to try clarifying you post (particularly if my
>>> assumptions were incorrect) and resubmitting it to
>>> microsoft.public.inetsdk.programming.scripting.jscript. There is a
>>> definite server-side slant to your issue, and doubly-submitted requests
>>> surely can cause database issues, but your most effective solutions are
>>> likely to reside on the client end.
>>>
>>>
>>> -Mark
>>>
>>>
>>> btw, to any of you that might care to flame me for taking a shot at that
>>> guy, first ask yourself, "does he have a valid point?" And second, be
>>> sure to quote back the "offensive" part because that guy likely has me
>>> kill-filtered, and I'd hate for him to have to wonder about what was
>>> said.
>>>
>>>
>>>> "Evertjan." wrote in message
>>>> news:Xns9673F29B1D72Eeejj99@194.109.133.242...
>>>>> Jeff wrote on 12 jun 2005 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.db:
>>>>>
>>>>>> This has probably been asked 100's of times, but I couldn't find
>>>>>> anything on it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there a small script of some sort, that would disable the ability
>>>>>> to double click a submit button>?
>>>>>
>>>>> ASP runs serverside and does know noting about clicking.
>>>>>
>>>>> Databases under ASP know even less.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please ask a apopriate clientside NG.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Evertjan.
>>>>> The Netherlands.
>>>>> (Replace all crosses with dots in my emailaddress)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: Double click - OT rebut

Per your request...

Jeff asked:
> This has probably been asked 100's of times, but I couldn't find
> anything on it.
> Is there a small script of some sort, that would disable the ability
> to double click a submit button>?

Evertjan said:
ASP runs serverside and does know noting about clicking.
Databases under ASP know even less.

I say:
Other than his grammar, since English is most likely not his native
language, he is stating fact. Anything involving the user is client-side.
m.p.inetserver.asp.db has nothing to do with client-side anything and there
is NO client-side ASP. Perhaps MSFT might one day consider ACP (Active
Client Pages) but for now, this is all we have (ex. ASP.NET - also
server-side)

Evertjan requested:
Please ask a apopriate clientside NG.

I say:
Sounds simple enough. The question is not ASP nor DB related and the OP is
requesting help with a client-side issue. Evertjan didn't ask for a
response. Jeff could have just posed his question in a client-side NG,
which everyone, including you has suggested!!! ... and I'm sure we'd all be
a lot happier had he done so. Learn to pick your battles.

Jeff so eloquently said:
: > Thanks for your NOT SO FRIENDLY response.

I say:
Point out the first not-so friendly response Evertjan made, Jeff. I'd say
this is where it went south. You asked for help, you asked in the wrong
place, someone took the time to respond to you to EDUCATE you, politely
asked you to ask in an appropriate NG and you tore them a new one. You'll
notice most others have not responded other than to agree that you're being
ridiculous. You made a mistake. Your appropriate response should have
been, which is not required, "Thank you."

Jeff said:
: > I thought, since the form is
: > written with asp, and it submits to an asp page, and the results are
: > displayed with asp, that this was the place to ask.

I say:
And you were wrong. But rather than thank the person who took the time to
point out the error and suggest a more appropriate place to ask your
question, which will increase your odds dramatically for getting a solution,
you chose to personally attack the person helping you. Your request and
your bitch is just as ridiculous if you went to your Dr. and asked him about
lawn care. While he may be able to answer your question, he would most
likely say, "I have no idea. Why don't you ask a gardener?" So, following
your method of followup, one could only assume it would be similar to,
"Well, thanks for your NOT SO FRIENDLY response. I thought since you have a
lawn, and you see that lawn everyday, surely you were the person to ask. I
didn't see a sign that read Medical Gardener. I know that most in here, if
there is a solution, would give it. Therefore, I do not accept your
response, and will wait patiently to see if someone can help me. To which
the Dr. might reply, "Ok, I misdiagnosed you. You're not sick, you're
crazy!"

Jeff said:
: > I didn't see a NG
: > labled submit buttons.

I say:
So, you're not only wrong, rude and hot-headed, you're now being an ass.
How do you get submit buttons NG when Evertjan clearly stated CLIENT-SIDE.
You don't. It's your attempt at either humor or sarcasm. Neither worked
well.

Jeff said:
: > I know that most in here, if there was a solution, would give it.

I say:
I'll take that bet since you don't even know how many people visit this NG
and I'm sure that number fluctuates constantly. And I would disagree with
your assessment since only one has responded in your favor, after including
his personal attack.

Jeff said:
: > Therefore, I do not accept your response, and will wait patiently to see
: > if someone can help me.

I say:
Well, you get what you pay for. Perhaps you should not concede to waiting
patiently but rather spend your time wisely by researching the issue to
educate yourself. NGs are not guaranteed. However, you might want to give
it a shot in a client-side NG.

Mark said:
: Don't mind him, he's just the resident know-nothing butt-head.

I say:
I disagree. While Evertjan and I have had our differences, I don't think he
classifies as a know-nothing. That statement implies you perceive yourself
to be superior, in some way.

Mark said:
: Whatever glimpse of programming he may have once had is now eclipsed by a
bad
: personality and a tendency to be wrong much of the time.

I say:
Whether you feel that way about him or not has nothing to do with the
response he gave to Jeff. It was neither rude nor wrong. Yours however was
both.

Mark said:
: (I suspect there
: may be a language barrier issue as well, but his level of arrogance isn't
: usually present in such cases, so the jury is still out on that score.)

I say:
Where was the arrogance here? "Please..."???

Mark said:
: I'm going to assume that by "double click" you mean double submit, where
the
: user clicks the submit button a second time, before the first request has
: been delivered to the user's browser, but after the first request has been
: received by the server.

I say:
Do you often assume double submit when someone says double-click? Surely
Jeff knows the difference between double-click and double submit. Oh wait,
perhaps you're right. Jeff hasn't been right yet so why should I assume he
is aware of the difference.

Mark said:
: Unfortunately there isn't a bunch you can do about this on the server
side.

I say:
Which is the response Evertjan gave. Does this now put you in the
know-nothing resident butthead category?

Mark said:
: You might try time-stamping the requests as they come in, and discarding
ant
: that are received within a certain proximity, but this can be difficult to
: do, depending on the processing that's involved.

I say:
So, try to deal with it on the server-side when it is easily handled on the
client-side? Perhaps this is just one reason he [Jeff] should be asking in
an appropriate NG.

Mark:
: There is of course the widely used "social engineering" scheme (i.e., the
: 'do not press this button more than once' warning) but sadly it's less
than
: effective.

I say:
It's no more of a solution than your first suggestion.

Mark said:
: There are some client-side remedys, such as hiding the button after it has
: been clicked, but before the request has been submitted (process onclick)
: but I had 7 kinds of hell trying to make that work in non-IE browsers, and
: finally gave up.

I say:
(see previous response)

Mark said:
: You might want to try clarifying you post (particularly if my assumptions
: were incorrect) and resubmitting it to
: microsoft.public.inetsdk.programming.scripting.jscript.

I say:
It's de ja vu all over again.

Mark said:
: There is a definite
: server-side slant to your issue, and doubly-submitted requests surely can
: cause database issues, but your most effective solutions are likely to
: reside on the client end.

I say:
So, in the end, after shooting the messenger, you chose to side with him.
While I don't like everyone on this news server, I am sure not all like me.
I have had my share of run-ins and I've even accidentally shot the wrong
person I was trying to defend. S**t happens. However, the simple truth is,
when you're right, you're right. Bitching about someone you don't like,
possibly because you have a captive audience [ Jeff ], when you actually
agree with [him] the messenger [Evertjan], is just plain coffee-house crap
but I guess it does add to the drama.

Mark said:
: btw, to any of you that might care to flame me for taking a shot at that
: guy, first ask yourself, "does he have a valid point?" And second, be
sure
: to quote back the "offensive" part because that guy likely has me
: kill-filtered, and I'd hate for him to have to wonder about what was said.

1. Yes he [Evertjan] does, you don't. Jeff asked in the wrong NG and should
have moved it to a client-side NG. You were wrong in siding with him [Jeff]
and responding to a client-side request in a server-side DB newsgroup. Your
personal attack against Evertjan should been made to him, not Jeff. (my
opinion) First-person is always more effective than third-person. As
you'll note, I didn't respond to Evertjan re: your comments. *raises
eyebrow*

2. Say please, Evertjan did. (O:= BTW... I doubt you care one way or the
other.

To sum it up, Jeff screwed up, Evertjan tried to educate and help him
[Jeff], you screwed up Jeff even more without providing a solution,
answering a client-side request in a server-side DB NG, poorly I might add,
and I wasted even more bandwidth defending someone I disagree with
sometimes, because, he was right.

--
Roland Hall
/* This information is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
without any warranty; without even the implied warranty of merchantability
or fitness for a particular purpose. */
Technet Script Center - http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter/
WSH 5.6 Documentation - http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/list/webdev.asp
MSDN Library - http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp

Re: Double click

Hi there!

I usually combine a javascript onclick which disables the submit
button after the first click, then a Response.Redirect on the server
script to force the client reloading the page in a 'GET' request.

antoine, cc

Re: Double click - OT rebut

"Roland Hall" wrote in message
news:eHpGib$bFHA.2980@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Per your request...

You obviously have way too much time on your hands... seriously. I'm not
going to respond with chapter and verse, there are just a couple of things I
want to point out:

You mentioned some past disagreements with Evertjan, so I take it you
basically concur with my opinion of him. I for one am sick of his
self-appointed guardian of the Usenet crap, he writes more about Netiquitte
than he does the topics themselves. He also has this tendency to be
technically wrong, and the fact that you've disagreed with him in the past
by definition means that you also think this is the case.

Now if he had a long history of actually helping people with their questions
(which would entail being right at least the majority of the time) it
wouldn't be so irritating -- like for instance when Bob Barrows mentions a
point of Netiquitte, it seems totally appropriate to me, partly because he
helps a LOT of people. Further, time after time after time, he's
technically right on the money, and on the rare occaisons that he's not, he
goes out of his way to learn from it. His approach is also substantially
less offensive, but I digress. (Sorry to drag you into this Bob.)

Next point, just today this EXACT same subject was discussed at length in
microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general, sans pissing and moaning about
whether it was on topic. Some of the same solutions I mentioned were
brought-up, including the use of DB constraints, which absolutely fits the
topic here. Point being that what you see so clearly as being OT, may not
seem quite that way to everyone.

Lastly, about my assumptions that you scoffed, didn't you read the reply
closely enough to see that I was right? I reached those assumptions partly
due to the fact that a submit button in a form will not receive ondblclick,
nor will any button that processes onclick. So you're penalizing me for
correctly interpreting his question? Maybe if Evertjan had done so as well,
he would've seen that the question was not entirely off-topic. There is a
definite marriage of server and client-side code, in fact it might be argued
that ASP is nearly useless without a client on the other end to consume its
output. So there's going to be some cross-over discussion, get real with
it.

In closing, I think you should come down off your soap box, and quit
defending someone you know to be abrasive and technically challenged. You
reference past experiences, why do you demand that my comments be restricted
to just the context of this thread? I think it was perfectly clear that I
was speaking historically, so lighten up. If your contention is that taking
such shots is inappropriate on the Usenet, in the general sense I agree --
this guy is a special case though.

And as for Evertjan, he just needs to STFU.


-Mark




> Jeff asked:
>> This has probably been asked 100's of times, but I couldn't find
>> anything on it.
>> Is there a small script of some sort, that would disable the ability
>> to double click a submit button>?
>
> Evertjan said:
> ASP runs serverside and does know noting about clicking.
> Databases under ASP know even less.
>
> I say:
> Other than his grammar, since English is most likely not his native
> language, he is stating fact. Anything involving the user is client-side.
> m.p.inetserver.asp.db has nothing to do with client-side anything and
> there
> is NO client-side ASP. Perhaps MSFT might one day consider ACP (Active
> Client Pages) but for now, this is all we have (ex. ASP.NET - also
> server-side)
>
> Evertjan requested:
> Please ask a apopriate clientside NG.
>
> I say:
> Sounds simple enough. The question is not ASP nor DB related and the OP
> is
> requesting help with a client-side issue. Evertjan didn't ask for a
> response. Jeff could have just posed his question in a client-side NG,
> which everyone, including you has suggested!!! ... and I'm sure we'd all
> be
> a lot happier had he done so. Learn to pick your battles.
>
> Jeff so eloquently said:
> : > Thanks for your NOT SO FRIENDLY response.
>
> I say:
> Point out the first not-so friendly response Evertjan made, Jeff. I'd say
> this is where it went south. You asked for help, you asked in the wrong
> place, someone took the time to respond to you to EDUCATE you, politely
> asked you to ask in an appropriate NG and you tore them a new one. You'll
> notice most others have not responded other than to agree that you're
> being
> ridiculous. You made a mistake. Your appropriate response should have
> been, which is not required, "Thank you."
>
> Jeff said:
> : > I thought, since the form is
> : > written with asp, and it submits to an asp page, and the results are
> : > displayed with asp, that this was the place to ask.
>
> I say:
> And you were wrong. But rather than thank the person who took the time to
> point out the error and suggest a more appropriate place to ask your
> question, which will increase your odds dramatically for getting a
> solution,
> you chose to personally attack the person helping you. Your request and
> your bitch is just as ridiculous if you went to your Dr. and asked him
> about
> lawn care. While he may be able to answer your question, he would most
> likely say, "I have no idea. Why don't you ask a gardener?" So,
> following
> your method of followup, one could only assume it would be similar to,
> "Well, thanks for your NOT SO FRIENDLY response. I thought since you have
> a
> lawn, and you see that lawn everyday, surely you were the person to ask.
> I
> didn't see a sign that read Medical Gardener. I know that most in here,
> if
> there is a solution, would give it. Therefore, I do not accept your
> response, and will wait patiently to see if someone can help me. To which
> the Dr. might reply, "Ok, I misdiagnosed you. You're not sick, you're
> crazy!"
>
> Jeff said:
> : > I didn't see a NG
> : > labled submit buttons.
>
> I say:
> So, you're not only wrong, rude and hot-headed, you're now being an ass.
> How do you get submit buttons NG when Evertjan clearly stated CLIENT-SIDE.
> You don't. It's your attempt at either humor or sarcasm. Neither worked
> well.
>
> Jeff said:
> : > I know that most in here, if there was a solution, would give it.
>
> I say:
> I'll take that bet since you don't even know how many people visit this NG
> and I'm sure that number fluctuates constantly. And I would disagree with
> your assessment since only one has responded in your favor, after
> including
> his personal attack.
>
> Jeff said:
> : > Therefore, I do not accept your response, and will wait patiently to
> see
> : > if someone can help me.
>
> I say:
> Well, you get what you pay for. Perhaps you should not concede to waiting
> patiently but rather spend your time wisely by researching the issue to
> educate yourself. NGs are not guaranteed. However, you might want to
> give
> it a shot in a client-side NG.
>
> Mark said:
> : Don't mind him, he's just the resident know-nothing butt-head.
>
> I say:
> I disagree. While Evertjan and I have had our differences, I don't think
> he
> classifies as a know-nothing. That statement implies you perceive
> yourself
> to be superior, in some way.
>
> Mark said:
> : Whatever glimpse of programming he may have once had is now eclipsed by
> a
> bad
> : personality and a tendency to be wrong much of the time.
>
> I say:
> Whether you feel that way about him or not has nothing to do with the
> response he gave to Jeff. It was neither rude nor wrong. Yours however
> was
> both.
>
> Mark said:
> : (I suspect there
> : may be a language barrier issue as well, but his level of arrogance
> isn't
> : usually present in such cases, so the jury is still out on that score.)
>
> I say:
> Where was the arrogance here? "Please..."???
>
> Mark said:
> : I'm going to assume that by "double click" you mean double submit, where
> the
> : user clicks the submit button a second time, before the first request
> has
> : been delivered to the user's browser, but after the first request has
> been
> : received by the server.
>
> I say:
> Do you often assume double submit when someone says double-click? Surely
> Jeff knows the difference between double-click and double submit. Oh
> wait,
> perhaps you're right. Jeff hasn't been right yet so why should I assume
> he
> is aware of the difference.
>
> Mark said:
> : Unfortunately there isn't a bunch you can do about this on the server
> side.
>
> I say:
> Which is the response Evertjan gave. Does this now put you in the
> know-nothing resident butthead category?
>
> Mark said:
> : You might try time-stamping the requests as they come in, and discarding
> ant
> : that are received within a certain proximity, but this can be difficult
> to
> : do, depending on the processing that's involved.
>
> I say:
> So, try to deal with it on the server-side when it is easily handled on
> the
> client-side? Perhaps this is just one reason he [Jeff] should be asking
> in
> an appropriate NG.
>
> Mark:
> : There is of course the widely used "social engineering" scheme (i.e.,
> the
> : 'do not press this button more than once' warning) but sadly it's less
> than
> : effective.
>
> I say:
> It's no more of a solution than your first suggestion.
>
> Mark said:
> : There are some client-side remedys, such as hiding the button after it
> has
> : been clicked, but before the request has been submitted (process
> onclick)
> : but I had 7 kinds of hell trying to make that work in non-IE browsers,
> and
> : finally gave up.
>
> I say:
> (see previous response)
>
> Mark said:
> : You might want to try clarifying you post (particularly if my
> assumptions
> : were incorrect) and resubmitting it to
> : microsoft.public.inetsdk.programming.scripting.jscript.
>
> I say:
> It's de ja vu all over again.
>
> Mark said:
> : There is a definite
> : server-side slant to your issue, and doubly-submitted requests surely
> can
> : cause database issues, but your most effective solutions are likely to
> : reside on the client end.
>
> I say:
> So, in the end, after shooting the messenger, you chose to side with him.
> While I don't like everyone on this news server, I am sure not all like
> me.
> I have had my share of run-ins and I've even accidentally shot the wrong
> person I was trying to defend. S**t happens. However, the simple truth
> is,
> when you're right, you're right. Bitching about someone you don't like,
> possibly because you have a captive audience [ Jeff ], when you actually
> agree with [him] the messenger [Evertjan], is just plain coffee-house crap
> but I guess it does add to the drama.
>
> Mark said:
> : btw, to any of you that might care to flame me for taking a shot at that
> : guy, first ask yourself, "does he have a valid point?" And second, be
> sure
> : to quote back the "offensive" part because that guy likely has me
> : kill-filtered, and I'd hate for him to have to wonder about what was
> said.
>
> 1. Yes he [Evertjan] does, you don't. Jeff asked in the wrong NG and
> should
> have moved it to a client-side NG. You were wrong in siding with him
> [Jeff]
> and responding to a client-side request in a server-side DB newsgroup.
> Your
> personal attack against Evertjan should been made to him, not Jeff. (my
> opinion) First-person is always more effective than third-person. As
> you'll note, I didn't respond to Evertjan re: your comments. *raises
> eyebrow*
>
> 2. Say please, Evertjan did. (O:= BTW... I doubt you care one way or the
> other.
>
> To sum it up, Jeff screwed up, Evertjan tried to educate and help him
> [Jeff], you screwed up Jeff even more without providing a solution,
> answering a client-side request in a server-side DB NG, poorly I might
> add,
> and I wasted even more bandwidth defending someone I disagree with
> sometimes, because, he was right.
>
> --
> Roland Hall
> /* This information is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
> without any warranty; without even the implied warranty of merchantability
> or fitness for a particular purpose. */
> Technet Script Center - http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter/
> WSH 5.6 Documentation -
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/list/webdev.asp
> MSDN Library - http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp
>
>

Re: Double click - OT rebut

"Mark J. McGinty" wrote in message
news:uzqre.63$Ce7.32@fed1read03...

Thanks for your response.

: You obviously have way too much time on your hands... seriously.

Not really, I type over 125wpm and you invited the discussion.

: You mentioned some past disagreements with Evertjan, so I take it you
: basically concur with my opinion of him.

No, I don't. My opinion is my own and I already stated I didn't agree that
he is a know-nothing. A language barrier and environmental difference says
a lot. I find most Brits brash but after getting to know some, I change my
opinion about some of them, but they're a product of their environment.
And, I've never met a francophone I liked, unless you include 'to shoot at.'
I have no idea where Evertjan is from, possibly Norway. I've only met one
Norwegian I ever liked but that's me. Probably because all the others were
trying to rip-off (ahem) WERE ripping off the company I worked for. It's
not Evertjan's fault and any issues I may have with him, will be expressed
to him, good or bad. If he's helpful, I'll thank him. If not, I'll respond
appropriately and I expect the same in return. It's called respect.
Disagreeing with someone doesn't mean you do not respect all of their
opinions or their expertise. It just means you disagree with them at that
moment.

: I for one am sick of his
: self-appointed guardian of the Usenet crap, he writes more about
Netiquitte
: than he does the topics themselves.

There's always that kill-file thang. Just about anyone frequents the
alt.javascript.* NGs is pretty much whacko with the netiquette. BTW..
thanks for top-posting. Can you provide any book you have ever read that
was written this way? (O:=

: He also has this tendency to be
: technically wrong, and the fact that you've disagreed with him in the past
: by definition means that you also think this is the case.

I disagree with a lot of people but I also learn a lot, even from those I
disagree with. There are many ways to skin a c-a-t . I
don't need the cat freaking out.

: Now if he had a long history of actually helping people with their
questions
: (which would entail being right at least the majority of the time) it
: wouldn't be so irritating --

Perhaps this is not he only server where he posts? And, I really haven't
been keeping score.

: like for instance when Bob Barrows mentions a
: point of Netiquitte, it seems totally appropriate to me, partly because he
: helps a LOT of people. Further, time after time after time, he's
: technically right on the money, and on the rare occaisons that he's not,
he
: goes out of his way to learn from it. His approach is also substantially
: less offensive, but I digress. (Sorry to drag you into this Bob.)

Bob is quite helpful but he also has the tendancy to catch a wild hair. So,
I guess he's human afterall. [tearing down the shrine] You know, they say
we like people most like ourselves. I guess that means you're probably not
from Norway.

: Next point, just today this EXACT same subject was discussed at length in
: microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general, sans pissing and moaning about
: whether it was on topic.

Well, I agree it's ridiculous to bitch about it being OT and then have a 50+
thread re: the OTness.

: Some of the same solutions I mentioned were
: brought-up, including the use of DB constraints, which absolutely fits the
: topic here. Point being that what you see so clearly as being OT, may not
: seem quite that way to everyone.

Yes, I am an individual, just like everyone else. I took issue because
Evertjan, however you feel about him, was actually helpful and cordial in
his response. Perhaps [you], emphasis implied, were looking for the
negative given your past experiences and your current attitude towards him.
Jeff ripped him a new one. Perhaps I am different but I'm not prone to
helping anyone who shoots the messenger. I understand and sympathize asking
for help on a NG, with the latency, is frustrating considering you're
already ready to go on a 3-state killing spree and then to get a response
of, "This is a client-side issue. Please ask in an appropriate newsgroup."
that's the match that hit the fuse. I didn't see a need to jump on Jeff
because there were already responses. No need to beat a dead horse.
However, when you then took the opportunity to express your opinions of
Evertjan, in third person, as if to reward Jeff for his rudeness and
hostility, you hit a nerve and also you invited the discussion. Had
Evertjan been vicious in his response, we would not be discussing it now.
Call me old fashioned but I believe in rewarding for good behavior and
punishing for bad. Every day is a new day. If someone irritates you, you
can easily block their posts. Perhaps it's my Italian heritage but I prefer
to keep confrontational associates very close.

: Lastly, about my assumptions that you scoffed, didn't you read the reply
: closely enough to see that I was right?

If you're referring to the double-click vs. double-submit, yes I read it
very close and did not agree until I read Jeff's response to you. It's
still not a server-side issue. It may not even be a client-side issue. It
sounds like an intelligence issue or latency due to lack of performance, "I
can't wait, I can't wait....the server better hurry up or I'm gonna' click
it again....Dear God, give me strength.....ah
....aaaaah...aaaaaaaaaaaaaah....CLICK, CLICK, CLICK, CLICK, CLICK....oh
dayum...that was good...[lights cigarette]!

: I reached those assumptions partly
: due to the fact that a submit button in a form will not receive
ondblclick,
: nor will any button that processes onclick.

A submit button is a form element. ASP knows nothing about forms, elements
or mouse clicks. onclick, ondblclick, onmousedown, onmouseup, etc. are all
client-side issues. Just because it submits a form does not qualify it as
ASP related, even if it calls an ASP page. Anything the OP could disable
would be on the client-side. Also a submit button can also be an image or
it could be a plain ole button with an [DHTML] onclick event. I'm surprised
you didn't mention anything regarding the cache. However, sometimes there's
no fix for stupidity.

: So you're penalizing me for
: correctly interpreting his question?

No.

1. I'm not penalizing you. I'm offering my opinion at your invitation. Do
you feel penalized?
2. I am doing so because I disagree with the remarks related to Evertjan, in
this thread. I think Jeff blew up because he didn't get the response he
wanted. My suggestion to him would then be to hire someone to solve the
issue.

: Maybe if Evertjan had done so as well,
: he would've seen that the question was not entirely off-topic.

Perhaps, but I doubt it. I still think it's OT.

: There is a
: definite marriage of server and client-side code, in fact it might be
argued
: that ASP is nearly useless without a client on the other end to consume
its
: output.

So, following that methodology, the Internet is all server-side related
because you can only connect to a server process on the Internet.

: So there's going to be some cross-over discussion, get real with
: it.

Yes there is but when the issue is client-side, it's only fair it should be
done in a client-side NG. However, I am willing to concede if you would
agree then that any topic, client/server, auto body, typewriter maintenance,
pr0n and girl scout issues are warranted here too. You could translate that
to one ridiculous comment deserves another.

: In closing, I think you should come down off your soap box, and quit
: defending someone you know to be abrasive and technically challenged.

Pay me and I'll do as you request. I'll warn you now, I'm expensive. (O:=

: You reference past experiences, why do you demand that my comments be
restricted
: to just the context of this thread?

Because the issue, at least related to Jeff, is that Jeff was in the wrong,
not Evertjan. I thought only women brought up past arguments.

: I think it was perfectly clear that I
: was speaking historically, so lighten up.

I've noticed, over time, the conversation usually loses it's flavor as the
response nears the end. Clearly, you must agree my Dr. Gardener analogy was
humorous, however accurate. I'd even bet there is a Dr. out there with the
last name Gardener.

: If your contention is that taking
: such shots is inappropriate on the Usenet, in the general sense I agree --
: this guy is a special case though.

No, I don't think that. I think, as I stated earlier, rewards for good
behavior...etc.

: And as for Evertjan, he just needs to STFU.

One last plug, eh? ...again in 3rd person. Perhaps it is you that needs to
lighten up?!

Here's one last thought, since I know you love netiquette responses. It
might be helpful to those of us who do not top-post if you would remove the
previous message since it is a lot easier to press ALT+TAB to refer to the
previous post than to consistently scroll up and down, not to mention the
disk space and bandwidth savings... so it's not left up to the rest of us to
do it. Just a suggestion.

Have a nice day!

--
Roland Hall
/* This information is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
without any warranty; without even the implied warranty of merchantability
or fitness for a particular purpose. */
Technet Script Center - http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter/
WSH 5.6 Documentation - http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/list/webdev.asp
MSDN Library - http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp

Re: Double click

Wow, really, I didn't mean to start a NG war. My apologies to both sides of
this.



"Jeff" wrote in message
news:x_adnTEmpql5NjHfRVn-uQ@adelphia.com...
> This has probably been asked 100's of times, but I couldn't find anything
> on it.
>
> Is there a small script of some sort, that would disable the ability to
> double click a submit button>?
>
>

Re: Double click

Jeff,

I had the exact same issue with an app I wrote for my local community
theater.

My soultion was to save a Session variable when the form was initially sent
to the client. Then, when the client submits the form, I test that value. If
it was as I set it, I immediately change it to something else and process the
data. If it was not as I set it when I sent the from originally, then I
assume the form was submitted twice and I process the submission as an error.

HTH.

John



"Jeff" wrote:

> Wow, really, I didn't mean to start a NG war. My apologies to both sides of
> this.
>
>
>
> "Jeff" wrote in message
> news:x_adnTEmpql5NjHfRVn-uQ@adelphia.com...
> > This has probably been asked 100's of times, but I couldn't find anything
> > on it.
> >
> > Is there a small script of some sort, that would disable the ability to
> > double click a submit button>?
> >
> >
>
>
>

Re: Double click

Don't worry about it. Just don't let your feelings get hurt if you sometimes
get a "wrong newsgroup" reply. The term "double-click" is a client-side term
and has no meaning in ASP. That is why you got the initial responses that
you did. Had you explained that you were trying to block someone from
submitting a form twice as became apparent in later posts you would have
gotten more informative responses (the subject comes up about once a week).

--
--Mark Schupp


"Jeff" wrote in message
news:FpSdnaFtVpF4OTPfRVn-iA@adelphia.com...
> Wow, really, I didn't mean to start a NG war. My apologies to both sides
> of this.
>
>
>
> "Jeff" wrote in message
> news:x_adnTEmpql5NjHfRVn-uQ@adelphia.com...
>> This has probably been asked 100's of times, but I couldn't find anything
>> on it.
>>
>> Is there a small script of some sort, that would disable the ability to
>> double click a submit button>?
>>
>>
>
>

Re: Double click

"Jeff" wrote in message
news:FpSdnaFtVpF4OTPfRVn-iA@adelphia.com...
> Wow, really, I didn't mean to start a NG war. My apologies to both sides
> of this.

Don't sweat it, it's not your fault. You might want to check-out the
thread "Preventing 2nd form submission" in
microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general.

Re: Double click

I went there, and the hidden field random number seems like a good idea. i
believe that the second clicks are accidental on my site, like it taking a
second to do something. i will give anything a try, so thanks for the
direction.


"Mark J. McGinty" wrote in message
news:%234NZ9aPcFHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> "Jeff" wrote in message
> news:FpSdnaFtVpF4OTPfRVn-iA@adelphia.com...
>> Wow, really, I didn't mean to start a NG war. My apologies to both sides
>> of this.
>
> Don't sweat it, it's not your fault. You might want to check-out the
> thread "Preventing 2nd form submission" in
> microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general.
>
>
>
>

Re: Double click - OT rebut

"Roland Hall" wrote in message
news:%23xGiZ5LcFHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> "Mark J. McGinty" wrote in message
> news:uzqre.63$Ce7.32@fed1read03...

[vigorously snipped]

> I have no idea where Evertjan is from, possibly Norway.

His sig says The Netherlands, but I see no relevance, I'm not a racist, I
think the human race as a whole (minus a few select individuals) pretty much
sucks.

> Disagreeing with someone doesn't mean you do not respect all of their
> opinions or their expertise. It just means you disagree with them at that
> moment.

It usually is that way, but in this case, for me personally, it's not, I
respect him not at all. And you keep criticizing me for making third-person
comments, he is completely free to participate, I'd much rather address him
directly. Trouble is, he doesn't discuss issues intelligently and
objectively, he reaches his conclusions, and then he explains those
conclusions repeatedly, in varying, but always diminuitive and condescending
ways. I can handle abrasive and I can handle wrong, but the two together
make a really poor combination.


> Bob is quite helpful but he also has the tendancy to catch a wild hair.

Doesn't everybody? Particularly yourself... interesting that you'd voice
that observation, hadn't noticed it in his writing, but I just snipped a
bucket full of that stuff out of this.


> I took issue because Evertjan, however you feel about him, was actually
> helpful and cordial in his response.

He clearly offended Jeff, and it was [for me] easy to see how/why. The mere
inclusion of the word "please" does not make it cordial... Example: "pretty
please, would you just give me the freakin answer, bitch." It said "please"
didn't it? I guess "cordial" is a subjective term.


> "This is a client-side issue. Please ask in an appropriate newsgroup."
> that's the match that hit the fuse.

If those had been his words, you'd have a point.


> Clearly, you must agree my Dr. Gardener analogy was
> humorous, however accurate. I'd even bet there is a Dr. out there with
> the
> last name Gardener.

It was tedious and exagerated -- massively overstated, actually -- and it
lacked a high degree of relevance/accuracy. A better anology might've
compared, say, a surgeon to an anesthesiologist -- same industry, similar
background/position, different specialty. I'll give you a nickel for the
pun though, if you got change for 2 bits.


And lastly, I'm going to comment on the next three statements, clipped from
your response, all at once, right below the last one...

>
> Perhaps, but I doubt it. I still think it's OT.
[snip-snip]

> Yes there is but when the issue is client-side, it's only fair it should
> be
> done in a client-side NG.
[snip-snip]

> Because the issue, at least related to Jeff, is that Jeff was in the
> wrong,
> not Evertjan.
[snip-snip]
>

If you'd care to read the rest of this thread, you may note that someone
mentions that this very subject comes up in this very ng about once a week.
Hmm. And it turns out that there are numerous readers of the ng that have
successfully deployed variations of what I mentioned, but you dismissed
without consideration, by applying the label, "ineffective." And as is also
mentioned, client-side remedies still leave you open to the user pushing the
back button, strongly suggesting that the most complete, if not the only
complete approach is on the server side.

So it's not just me, but several people here that see the server-side nature
of this question. And not just right now, but in the past, and surely in the
future too. And not just idle banter, but actual implementations. In fact,
it all begs the question, could it be any more on topic than that?

There are obvious inferences and conclusions that an objective person would
draw from these facts, I'll leave you to draw your own.

This concludes what I have to say about this beaten-to-a-bloody-pulp dead
horse... well... except maybe... (There's a line from the movie, "The New
Guy" that would be soooo perfect here, it is KiLlInG me not to use it...
biting my lip so hard it's about to bleed.) :-)

-Mark

Re: Double click - OT rebut

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C5719E.38759A90
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Just for the record, I wanted to post what I did to solve this (hoping =
not temporarilly).

I made an asp check, yes ASP, to check the DB to see if a post with the =
same username, and same results, was made within the last 5 seconds =
using the DATEDIFF function. If it is true, then it takes the user to a =
page and asks if they meant to double post for 2 games, if not, it tells =
them that the first report was posted. So far, problem solved.
Thanks
Jeff


"Mark J. McGinty" wrote in message =
news:Ojxv$kacFHA.740@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>=20
> "Roland Hall" wrote in message=20
> news:%23xGiZ5LcFHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> "Mark J. McGinty" wrote in message
>> news:uzqre.63$Ce7.32@fed1read03...
>=20
> [vigorously snipped]
>=20
>> I have no idea where Evertjan is from, possibly Norway.
>=20
> His sig says The Netherlands, but I see no relevance, I'm not a =
racist, I=20
> think the human race as a whole (minus a few select individuals) =
pretty much=20
> sucks.
>=20
>> Disagreeing with someone doesn't mean you do not respect all of their
>> opinions or their expertise. It just means you disagree with them at =
that
>> moment.
>=20
> It usually is that way, but in this case, for me personally, it's not, =
I=20
> respect him not at all. And you keep criticizing me for making =
third-person=20
> comments, he is completely free to participate, I'd much rather =
address him=20
> directly. Trouble is, he doesn't discuss issues intelligently and=20
> objectively, he reaches his conclusions, and then he explains those=20
> conclusions repeatedly, in varying, but always diminuitive and =
condescending=20
> ways. I can handle abrasive and I can handle wrong, but the two =
together=20
> make a really poor combination.
>=20
>=20
>> Bob is quite helpful but he also has the tendancy to catch a wild =
hair.
>=20
> Doesn't everybody? Particularly yourself... interesting that you'd =
voice=20
> that observation, hadn't noticed it in his writing, but I just snipped =
a=20
> bucket full of that stuff out of this.
>=20
>=20
>> I took issue because Evertjan, however you feel about him, was =
actually
>> helpful and cordial in his response.
>=20
> He clearly offended Jeff, and it was [for me] easy to see how/why. =
The mere=20
> inclusion of the word "please" does not make it cordial... Example: =
"pretty=20
> please, would you just give me the freakin answer, bitch." It said =
"please"=20
> didn't it? I guess "cordial" is a subjective term.
>=20
>=20
>> "This is a client-side issue. Please ask in an appropriate =
newsgroup."
>> that's the match that hit the fuse.
>=20
> If those had been his words, you'd have a point.
>=20
>=20
>> Clearly, you must agree my Dr. Gardener analogy was
>> humorous, however accurate. I'd even bet there is a Dr. out there =
with=20
>> the
>> last name Gardener.
>=20
> It was tedious and exagerated -- massively overstated, actually -- and =
it=20
> lacked a high degree of relevance/accuracy. A better anology might've =

> compared, say, a surgeon to an anesthesiologist -- same industry, =
similar=20
> background/position, different specialty. I'll give you a nickel for =
the=20
> pun though, if you got change for 2 bits.
>=20
>=20
> And lastly, I'm going to comment on the next three statements, clipped =
from=20
> your response, all at once, right below the last one...
>=20
>>
>> Perhaps, but I doubt it. I still think it's OT.
> [snip-snip]
>=20
>> Yes there is but when the issue is client-side, it's only fair it =
should=20
>> be
>> done in a client-side NG.
> [snip-snip]
>=20
>> Because the issue, at least related to Jeff, is that Jeff was in the=20
>> wrong,
>> not Evertjan.
> [snip-snip]
>>
>=20
> If you'd care to read the rest of this thread, you may note that =
someone=20
> mentions that this very subject comes up in this very ng about once a =
week.=20
> Hmm. And it turns out that there are numerous readers of the ng that =
have=20
> successfully deployed variations of what I mentioned, but you =
dismissed=20
> without consideration, by applying the label, "ineffective." And as =
is also=20
> mentioned, client-side remedies still leave you open to the user =
pushing the=20
> back button, strongly suggesting that the most complete, if not the =
only=20
> complete approach is on the server side.
>=20
> So it's not just me, but several people here that see the server-side =
nature=20
> of this question. And not just right now, but in the past, and surely =
in the=20
> future too. And not just idle banter, but actual implementations. In =
fact,=20
> it all begs the question, could it be any more on topic than that?
>=20
> There are obvious inferences and conclusions that an objective person =
would=20
> draw from these facts, I'll leave you to draw your own.
>=20
> This concludes what I have to say about this beaten-to-a-bloody-pulp =
dead=20
> horse... well... except maybe... (There's a line from the movie, "The =
New=20
> Guy" that would be soooo perfect here, it is KiLlInG me not to use =
it...=20
> biting my lip so hard it's about to bleed.) :-)
>=20
> -Mark
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>
------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C5719E.38759A90
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



charset=3Diso-8859-1">

Re: Double click - OT rebut

"Mark J. McGinty" wrote in message
news:Ojxv$kacFHA.740@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
:
: "Roland Hall" wrote in message
: news:%23xGiZ5LcFHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
: > "Mark J. McGinty" wrote in message
: > news:uzqre.63$Ce7.32@fed1read03...
:
: [vigorously snipped]

Translation: Trimming the content to increase the weight of my argument.

: > I have no idea where Evertjan is from, possibly Norway.
:
: His sig says The Netherlands, but I see no relevance, I'm not a racist, I
: think the human race as a whole (minus a few select individuals) pretty
much
: sucks.

You're right, you're not racist. You're anti-race. So was Hitler. Now I
understand why you appear to be so rabid about Evertjan. You might want to
consider therapy or anger management. Really!

: > Disagreeing with someone doesn't mean you do not respect all of their
: > opinions or their expertise. It just means you disagree with them at
that
: > moment.
:
: It usually is that way, but in this case, for me personally, it's not, I
: respect him not at all.

So, obviously not an objective point of view.

: And you keep criticizing me for making third-person
: comments, he is completely free to participate, I'd much rather address
him
: directly.

Cut the crap. If you wanted to address him directly, you could. It's just
easier to whine for sympathy. I started this dicussion with you with the
hope we could converse intelligently. I see now that is not possible.

: Trouble is, he doesn't discuss issues intelligently and
: objectively, he reaches his conclusions, and then he explains those
: conclusions repeatedly, in varying, but always diminuitive and
condescending
: ways.

So, then stop dicussing things with him. Just discuss things about him with
others. (O:=

: I can handle abrasive and I can handle wrong, but the two together
: make a really poor combination.

So, you're saying you can't handle it. Noted.

: > Bob is quite helpful but he also has the tendancy to catch a wild hair.
:
: Doesn't everybody?

Possibly. I haven't met everyone.

: Particularly yourself... interesting that you'd voice
: that observation, hadn't noticed it in his writing, but I just snipped a
: bucket full of that stuff out of this.

Ya', I'm not shy. You probably haven't noticed it with Bob because it
doesn't happen often and he is so helpful to so many. He also appears to
care that the OP gets the correct information that is best for the situation
so he offers complete answers to coding issues more so than just what the OP
requested.

: > I took issue because Evertjan, however you feel about him, was actually
: > helpful and cordial in his response.
:
: He clearly offended Jeff,

Then Jeff is easily offended but apparently has no problem offending others.

: and it was [for me] easy to see how/why.

Sure it was. You're looking though hate colored glasses. Learn to release
your anger and feel the power of the dark side.

: The mere
: inclusion of the word "please" does not make it cordial... Example:
"pretty
: please, would you just give me the freakin answer, bitch." It said
"please"
: didn't it? I guess "cordial" is a subjective term.

I would say your understanding of cordial is an oxymoron.

: > "This is a client-side issue. Please ask in an appropriate newsgroup."
: > that's the match that hit the fuse.
:
: If those had been his words, you'd have a point.

Let's see...

{
ASP runs serverside and does know noting about clicking.
Databases under ASP know even less.
Please ask a apopriate clientside NG.
}

You're either blind or in denial.

: > Clearly, you must agree my Dr. Gardener analogy was
: > humorous, however accurate. I'd even bet there is a Dr. out there with
: > the
: > last name Gardener.
:
: It was tedious and exagerated -- massively overstated, actually -- and it
: lacked a high degree of relevance/accuracy.

I'll bet some laughed at it. I've been laugh pretty much through this whole
thread.

: A better anology might've
: compared, say, a surgeon to an anesthesiologist -- same industry, similar
: background/position, different specialty.

Actually a Dr. and a garderner can be in the same industry.

: I'll give you a nickel for the
: pun though, if you got change for 2 bits.

You must be old. I haven't heard the term "2 bit" used since I was in Jr.
High and it was a cheer on the football field. "2 bits, 4 bits, 6 bits a
dollar. All for the , stand up and hollar!" So, perhaps
you're just a grumpy old man?!

: And lastly, I'm going to comment on the next three statements, clipped
from
: your response, all at once, right below the last one...

Don't hurt yourself... Everybody stand back... Mark's tryin' something
new...

: > Perhaps, but I doubt it. I still think it's OT.
: [snip-snip]
:
: > Yes there is but when the issue is client-side, it's only fair it should
: > be
: > done in a client-side NG.
: [snip-snip]
:
: > Because the issue, at least related to Jeff, is that Jeff was in the
: > wrong,
: > not Evertjan.
: [snip-snip]
: >

.... appears to be cosmetology. [snip-snip]

: If you'd care to read the rest of this thread, you may note that someone
: mentions that this very subject comes up in this very ng about once a
week.

Someone said or someone proved that? Sounds like a generalization to me.
Where's the proof it happens? Who keeps track of this stuff?

: Hmm.

I can name that song in 3 notes...

: And it turns out that there are numerous readers of the ng that have
: successfully deployed variations of what I mentioned, but you dismissed
: without consideration, by applying the label, "ineffective."

You're missing the point Wally. My main issue is your attack on Evertjan
without cause. BTW, I would do the same for you had Evertjan or anyone
attacked you in a similar manner, without cause.

I dismiss anything that is reactive rather than proactive unless there is no
other choice. I prefer solutions to work-arounds. I'm sure you're in
opposition to that philosophy but that's ok.

: And as is also
: mentioned, client-side remedies still leave you open to the user pushing
the
: back button, strongly suggesting that the most complete, if not the only
: complete approach is on the server side.

Client-side only is never a solution. It usually works well to deploy both
because of two factors, performance and security.

: So it's not just me, but several people here that see the server-side
nature
: of this question. And not just right now, but in the past, and surely in
the
: future too.

Now you can predict the future?

: And not just idle banter, but actual implementations.

What is the difference between an implementation and an actual
implementation?

: In fact,
: it all begs the question, could it be any more on topic than that?

Yes.

: There are obvious inferences and conclusions that an objective person
would
: draw from these facts, I'll leave you to draw your own.

Being completely unobjective and unable to draw, I am unble to infer or
conclude any facts whatsoever.

: This concludes what I have to say about this beaten-to-a-bloody-pulp dead
: horse... well... except maybe... (There's a line from the movie, "The New
: Guy" that would be soooo perfect here, it is KiLlInG me not to use it...
: biting my lip so hard it's about to bleed.) :-)

Now you're afraid to speak your mind or was that for dramatic effect?
Have a nice day, Mark, and try not to kill anyone.

--
Roland Hall
/* This information is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
without any warranty; without even the implied warranty of merchantability
or fitness for a particular purpose. */
Technet Script Center - http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter/
WSH 5.6 Documentation - http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/list/webdev.asp
MSDN Library - http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp

Re: Double click - OT rebut

"Jeff" wrote in message news:meCdnaIXZ4j_1C3fRVn-ig@adelphia.com...
Just for the record, I wanted to post what I did to solve this (hoping not
temporarilly).

Let's hope not. Jeff, please do not post in RTF format. Plain text is
preferred.

I made an asp check, yes ASP, to check the DB to see if a post with the same
username, and same results, was made within the last 5 seconds using the
DATEDIFF function. If it is true, then it takes the user to a page and asks
if they meant to double post for 2 games, if not, it tells them that the
first report was posted. So far, problem solved.

Considering your issue is latency since you stated some click again because
of a delay, let's hope the latency does not increase beyond 5 seconds or
your issue may reoccur.

Good luck.

--
Roland Hall
/* This information is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
without any warranty; without even the implied warranty of merchantability
or fitness for a particular purpose. */
Technet Script Center - http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter/
WSH 5.6 Documentation - http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/list/webdev.asp
MSDN Library - http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp

Re: Double click - OT rebut

Let me just say it didn't say it was latency. It may be due to a number of
things including it being a problem from the client-side why there is a
delay.

Also I see no rules stating do not post in RTF.

And hence his original topic was relevant!

--
Jon
warpedpixel@gmail.com
Look at that dead pixel on your screen! *SLAP* Gotcha!
"Roland Hall" wrote in message
news:OdxgtGhcFHA.3404@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

> "Jeff" wrote in message news:meCdnaIXZ4j_1C3fRVn-ig@adelphia.com...
> Just for the record, I wanted to post what I did to solve this (hoping not
> temporarilly).
>
> Let's hope not. Jeff, please do not post in RTF format. Plain text is
> preferred.
>
> I made an asp check, yes ASP, to check the DB to see if a post with the
> same
> username, and same results, was made within the last 5 seconds using the
> DATEDIFF function. If it is true, then it takes the user to a page and
> asks
> if they meant to double post for 2 games, if not, it tells them that the
> first report was posted. So far, problem solved.
>
> Considering your issue is latency since you stated some click again
> because
> of a delay, let's hope the latency does not increase beyond 5 seconds or
> your issue may reoccur.
>
> Good luck.
>
> --
> Roland Hall
> /* This information is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
> without any warranty; without even the implied warranty of merchantability
> or fitness for a particular purpose. */
> Technet Script Center - http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter/
> WSH 5.6 Documentation -
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/list/webdev.asp
> MSDN Library - http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp
>
>

Re: Double click - OT rebut

"Jon" wrote in message news:uKP4fpKdFHA.3620@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
: Let me just say it didn't say it was latency. It may be due to a number of
: things including it being a problem from the client-side why there is a
: delay.

Jon...

delay = latency See #2:
http://hyperdictionary.com/search.aspx?define=latency

: Also I see no rules stating do not post in RTF.

Show me any rules on this news server.

Not all news readers support RTF. It's best to use just plain-text. MSFT
converts RTF messages to HTML. HTML is discouraged in usenet.

--
Roland Hall
/* This information is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
without any warranty; without even the implied warranty of merchantability
or fitness for a particular purpose. */
Technet Script Center - http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter/
WSH 5.6 Documentation - http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/list/webdev.asp
MSDN Library - http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp

Re: Double click - OT rebut

I am aware of the definition of latency ... what i believe I was getting at
was where was his mention of latency. But anyway, never mind. I have better
things to do than argue with you

--
Jon
warpedpixel@gmail.com
Look at that dead pixel on your screen! *SLAP* Gotcha!


"Roland Hall" wrote in message
news:eRcvLxndFHA.2736@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> "Jon" wrote in message news:uKP4fpKdFHA.3620@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> : Let me just say it didn't say it was latency. It may be due to a number
> of
> : things including it being a problem from the client-side why there is a
> : delay.
>
> Jon...
>
> delay = latency See #2:
> http://hyperdictionary.com/search.aspx?define=latency
>
> : Also I see no rules stating do not post in RTF.
>
> Show me any rules on this news server.
>
> Not all news readers support RTF. It's best to use just plain-text. MSFT
> converts RTF messages to HTML. HTML is discouraged in usenet.
>
> --
> Roland Hall
> /* This information is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
> without any warranty; without even the implied warranty of merchantability
> or fitness for a particular purpose. */
> Technet Script Center - http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter/
> WSH 5.6 Documentation -
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/list/webdev.asp
> MSDN Library - http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp
>
>

Re: Double click

pay no attention to him..
he seldom has anything good to say


"Jeff" wrote in message
news:KIWdnT2ZLriTKzHfRVn-sw@adelphia.com...
> Thanks for your NOT SO FRIENDLY response. I thought, since the form is
> written with asp, and it submits to an asp page, and the results are
> displayed with asp, that this was the place to ask. I didn't see a NG
> labled submit buttons.
> I know that most in here, if there was a solution, would give it.
> Therefore, I do not accept your response, and will wait patiently to see
> if someone can help me.
>
> "Evertjan." wrote in message
> news:Xns9673F29B1D72Eeejj99@194.109.133.242...
>> Jeff wrote on 12 jun 2005 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.db:
>>
>>> This has probably been asked 100's of times, but I couldn't find
>>> anything on it.
>>>
>>> Is there a small script of some sort, that would disable the ability
>>> to double click a submit button>?
>>
>> ASP runs serverside and does know noting about clicking.
>>
>> Databases under ASP know even less.
>>
>> Please ask a apopriate clientside NG.
>>
>> --
>> Evertjan.
>> The Netherlands.
>> (Replace all crosses with dots in my emailaddress)
>>
>
>

Re: Double click - OT rebut

"Jon" wrote in message news:OgA4JtQeFHA.2244@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
:I am aware of the definition of latency ... what i believe I was getting at
: was where was his mention of latency. But anyway, never mind. I have
better
: things to do than argue with you

You entered with an argument, reposted the same argument saying you have
better things to do with your time than argue. Priceless.

--
Roland Hall
/* This information is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
without any warranty; without even the implied warranty of merchantability
or fitness for a particular purpose. */
Technet Script Center - http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter/
WSH 5.6 Documentation - http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/list/webdev.asp
MSDN Library - http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp