Form controller = FrontPage extensions?

[xfile]

Hi,

Is it true that using form (e.g. insert form) and/or use form for
registration requires FrontPage extensions?

Is there other alternatives for not using FP form?

After reading many articles, it seems to me that the only extension
component that we are using is the form and if it's possible, I don't wish
to be bound by FP extension simply because of one component.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Ronx]

If you write/find your own form handler, you can use PHP, Perl/CGI, ASP,
asp.NET - whatever your host will support - instead of FrontPage
extensions.
I only use FPextensions for demonstration purposes, and for publishing.
All my forms (except demonstrations) now use "classic" asp, but I will not
easily forgo the convenience provided by the FP extensions for site
management.

The FrontPage self registration component/form does require the
extensions - but you could write your own form handler to replace it.

 

[xfile]

Hi,

Thanks for the reply and explanations and sorry for the late reply.

So if we also used "classic" ASP codes for doing the confirmation page and
processing, does that mean we don't actually need FrontPage extension?

Is there a way that I can tell if our registration pages (several of them)
are using form handler or not? We do have use insert form and have it to be
redirected to another process page with ASP codes.

But if we use "publishing", we then need it?

Is there a tool or some kind of codes that we can use to know if our site is
actually using FrontPage extensions or not?

My understanding is that MS is moving (slowly) away from FP extensions, and
as far as I know, we are not using it (but I am not so sure). I wish to
know for sure so that I won't have to find a host (in the future) that must
have FP extension or have it install for us.

Many thanks in advance,

 

[Ronx]

If you are using the FP Self registration component, then you are hosted on
a Unix server which probably will not support ASP.
Open the form page in FrontPage, right click anywhere in the form and
choose Properties.
Check where the form is going - if "Send to Other" is selected, and "Custom
ISAPI, NSAPI, CGI, or ASP Script" is showing then that form is not using
the extensions. If any other radio is selected, or anything else shows in
the "Send to Other" dropdown list, then the form does use the extensions.

If you use publishing, then you need the extensions, though publishing with
FTP may be suitable for you, this does not require extensions but does not
work on all FTP servers (but a third party FTP client will.)

Check your forms (as above) to see which handler is being used.
Then check your pages for other components:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;281532 contains a
list.

 

[xfile]

Hi,

Confirmed that our registration forms are all with "Send to Other" and with
"Custom ISAPI..." even the form was initially inserted with FrontPage.

I do use CuteFTP Professional to upload/download some files, but not the
entire site since I read earlier doing so might "damage FrontPage
extensions" and I have no idea if we are using extensions or not. It's just
a custom that we always ordered FP extension as part of hosting service.

Thanks for the link and I happened to read it before and I was confused by
some components listed in the article.

So appreciate if you or anyone else could clarify some points listed in the
article:

(1) File Upload: What kind of file upload does this mean? Does it mean
using "import" from within FrontPage or ASPupload or FTP client to upload?

(2) New security features (user roles): I simply don't understand it at all.

(3) Nested subwebs: Does it mean a sub-web within the site or?

(4) StyleSheet links to multiple files or Active Server Pages (ASP) files:
Does it mean if we don't have FP extensions, we cannot use "classic" ASP
pages and use stylesheet (in the header section, such as <link
rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" >

(5) Field set: Cannot insert form field?

If the above are true, especially for ASP and stylesheet link, it is
impossible for us to move away from FP extensions.

Many thanks.

 

[Thomas A. Rowe]

See inline below

--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe
Microsoft MVP - FrontPage
==============================================
Agents Real Estate Listing Network
http://www.NReal.com
==============================================

Hi,

Confirmed that our registration forms are all with "Send to Other" and with "Custom ISAPI..." even
the form was initially inserted with FrontPage.

I do use CuteFTP Professional to upload/download some files, but not the entire site since I read
earlier doing so might "damage FrontPage extensions" and I have no idea if we are using extensions
or not. It's just a custom that we always ordered FP extension as part of hosting service.

Thanks for the link and I happened to read it before and I was confused by some components listed
in the article.

So appreciate if you or anyone else could clarify some points listed in the article:

(1) File Upload: What kind of file upload does this mean? Does it mean using "import" from within
FrontPage or ASPupload or FTP client to upload?

Allow site visitor to upload file to a specific folder within your site via http. The features only
works on Windows IIS web servers and must be allowed by your web host.

(2) New security features (user roles): I simply don't understand it at all.

This is a feature of the FP2002 extensions, which allows you to limit what other FP user within your
organization can do on the web site.

(3) Nested subwebs: Does it mean a sub-web within the site or?

Means that you can have a subweb under a subweb.

(4) StyleSheet links to multiple files or Active Server Pages (ASP) files: Does it mean if we
don't have FP extensions, we cannot use "classic" ASP pages and use stylesheet (in the header
section, such as <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" >

This has nothing to do with your ability to use any server-side scripting, such as Classic ASP.

 

[xfile]

Hi,

Many thanks for the kind explanations.

For the Field Set, I don't understand either, the article just listed it
without further details.

I guess we are fine at this time, and the best bet is to set up a local site
without any extensions installed and have a backup copy of the site
installed locally and test how it works.

But this approach takes too many efforts.

Again, thanks for the detailed explanations.