Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.php > #3934

Re: preg_match() oddities and question

Show all headers | View raw

In article <1438797.UceJUlZ0hu@PointedEars.de>,
 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

> > You have monitored swedish address search terms for fourteen years? We
> > should compare notes.
> 
> You are missing the point.

I disagree. :)

> The kind of structured data that you need to 
> enter in a form does not matter.  Using cursor keys to move the text cursor 
> between delimiters in a running text always causes has more accessibility 
> and usability problems, and consequently information processing problems, 
> than tabbing (or otherwise moving the focus) from one control to another.

Whatever gave you the idea that I am proposing a solution where the 
user would have to "use cursor keys to move the text cursor between 
delimiter in a running text"? I literally have no idea what you are 
talking about, and it has absolutely nothing to do with this thread.

> >> There are basic accessibility guidelines that no amount of
> >> development experience can substitute (although studying usability,
> >> as I did, can help).  Many of which must be followed per
> >> legislation in some countries.
> > 
> > This.. has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
> 
> You are just not seeing how much it has to do with the topic at hand.  

And you seem to be failing to explain how it does :)

> Changing the way people put in data towards one that is *actually* easier 
> for them solves, at least, three problems at once, including the one that 
> you have been asking about.

Adding form fields to make it more cumbersome for them to search for 
their address, however, does not.

My *experience* (i.e. not guessing, but rather - having done it 
exactly the way you propose) tells me that adding form fields to this 
situation adds more illegal search terms. Users tend to make more 
mistakes the more details you expect them to provide. Users often 
entered "X", "?" or "-" in the letter search field, or tried to type 
"none". Most of the time, however, they continued to type their entire 
address in the first field and then hit return.

When you find yourself having to educate or expect the user to provide 
data in a specific way is when you fail as a software engineer. You 
have to make it as easy as possible for them to search for their 
address - and the thing you're dealing with here is *Google*. People 
know how to Google, they Google whatever shit they can and Google just 
always manages to figure out pretty much exactly what they need - with 
one input field. That's the level your visitors are on. 

They shouldn't have to read labels or instructions to search for their 
address. Also the meaning of the street letter may be different 
depending on what kind of property you live in and whether your'e a 
company or a private person. All that has to be explained for these 
users, and my experience (i.e. actual facts provided by years and 
years on monitoring exactly this) shows me that this is not the 
correct way to deal with input data.

You are free to disagree all you want, and perhaps visitors to your 
applications and your digested search term analysis show you something 
else, but mine does not. When I wrote the OP and provided the examples 
it wasn't something out of the blue.

> >> > When I say it's inconvenient for the end user, it's not something I
> >> > make up on the spot to be obnoxious.
> >> Nevertheless, your logic is flawed.
> > 
> > Well, as long as you're merely saying that instead of actually, you 
> > know, substantiate that opinion, I have no idea what you expect me 
> > to do with it.
> > 
> > Words are easy :)
> 
> This is about as much as I will discuss this here because your *actual* 
> problem has nothing to do with PHP, and little to do with Regular 
> Expressions.

If you saw my followup to my OP you may have seen that I found the 
solution elsewhere and that it indeed was solved using PHp and regular 
expressions - just as I knew it could be :)





-- 
Sandman[.net]

Back to comp.lang.php | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

preg_match() oddities and question Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2011-11-22 12:21 +0100
  Re: preg_match() oddities and question The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-11-22 11:26 +0000
    Re: preg_match() oddities and question Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2011-11-22 12:36 +0100
    Re: preg_match() oddities and question Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-11-22 07:22 -0500
  Re: preg_match() oddities and question tony@mountifield.org (Tony Mountifield) - 2011-11-22 11:47 +0000
    Re: preg_match() oddities and question Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2011-11-22 13:12 +0100
  Re: preg_match() oddities and question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-11-22 13:30 +0100
    Re: preg_match() oddities and question Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2011-11-22 13:55 +0100
      Re: preg_match() oddities and question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-11-22 17:56 +0100
        Re: preg_match() oddities and question The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-11-22 17:30 +0000
          Re: preg_match() oddities and question "Peter H. Coffin" <hellsop@ninehells.com> - 2011-11-22 17:20 -0600
            Re: preg_match() oddities and question The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-11-22 23:59 +0000
            Re: preg_match() oddities and question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-11-23 01:59 +0100
              Re: preg_match() oddities and question Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2011-11-23 09:58 +0100
                Re: preg_match() oddities and question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-11-23 22:02 +0100
                Re: preg_match() oddities and question Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2011-11-24 08:20 +0100
                Re: preg_match() oddities and question Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2011-11-24 12:55 +0000
                Re: preg_match() oddities and question Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2011-11-25 09:36 +0100
                Re: preg_match() oddities and question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-11-24 22:41 +0100
                Re: preg_match() oddities and question Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2011-11-25 09:26 +0100
                Re: preg_match() oddities and question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-11-25 15:44 +0100
                Re: preg_match() oddities and question Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2011-11-25 16:34 +0100
                Re: preg_match() oddities and question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-11-25 23:23 +0100
              Re: preg_match() oddities and question The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-11-23 09:35 +0000
        Re: preg_match() oddities and question Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2011-11-23 09:55 +0100
          Re: preg_match() oddities and question "Peter H. Coffin" <hellsop@ninehells.com> - 2011-11-23 07:53 -0600
            Re: preg_match() oddities and question Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2011-11-23 19:01 +0100
              Re: preg_match() oddities and question The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-11-23 18:54 +0000
                Re: preg_match() oddities and question Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2011-11-23 20:23 +0100
              Re: preg_match() oddities and question "Peter H. Coffin" <hellsop@ninehells.com> - 2011-11-23 12:58 -0600
                Re: preg_match() oddities and question Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2011-11-24 08:28 +0100
  SOLVED: Re: preg_match() oddities and question Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2011-11-25 10:32 +0100
    Re: SOLVED: Re: preg_match() oddities and question Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-11-25 18:55 -0500
      Re: SOLVED: Re: preg_match() oddities and question Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2011-11-26 11:21 +0100

csiph-web