Contact page

[Barry360]

I've attempted to change my e-mail on my contact page.
I've changed the code + e-mail but it does no show the change on the website?

Changing from enquiries@see360degrees.com.au to barry@see360degrees.com.au
When click on enquiries@see360degrees.com.au it goes to the contact box.

http://www.see360degrees.com.au/success.html#

Thanks,
barry

[ralph.m]

Your link reads:

<a href="#">inquiries@see360degrees.com.au</a>

If you want a user's email to pen when they click that link, the code should be:

<a href="mailto:inquiries@see360degrees.com.au">inquiries@see360degrees.com.au</a>

As for the page not updating when you make a change, that's a different issue to do with FTP. How are you making the changes? With what program etc.

[tunnil]

You shouldn't use mailto: to send emails. For starters, it assumes the user has an email client installed on their device. If they haven't, then it won't work and they won't be able to send the email.

If you want users to be able to send you emails 100% of the time, then you need to send the email server side. If you're using PHP, you can use its mail() function to send emails.

[ralph.m]

If you want users to be able to send you emails 100% of the time, then you need to send the email server side. If you're using PHP, you can use its mail() function to send emails.

Well, he does have a contact form, too.

But yet, a raw mailto: like that is going to be a huge welcome mat to spammers. So it would be good to obfuscate that email address somehow.

[tunnil]

Well, he does have a contact form, too.

Then there is no need to use mailto: at all, especially since it won't work on all devices. LIke I said, this should all be done server side if you want it to work in 100% of cases

[ralph.m]

Then there is no need to use mailto: at all

There's no harm in having them both—and from a business POV, probably better. Forms can be handy, but are also a bit of a pain in the @ss sometimes.

[tunnil]

There's no harm in having them both—

I disagree.

In cases where mailto: doesn't work, you will need to provide a message saying why which can only lead to confusion and/or frustration for the user.

The info you fill in a form is exactly the same as what would be required in the email client, so there is no extra work or input for the user. Sending the email server side will work 100% of the time. Sending it client side will work in only some cases, so I will never use mailto: on a contact page.

[ralph.m]

I used to think that way, but have changed my mind. Being able to open your mail client (if available) makes it easier to type whatever you like, send attachments etc. without messing around with the correct content in the form fields etc. In the business world, I'm not sure if people really want to mess around with forms. Just my suspicion, anyhow.

[tunnil]

Being able to open your mail client (if available) makes it easier to type whatever you like, send attachments etc.

For me it's just as easy to type text in a contact form as it is to type it in an email client.

Sending attachments via a form is just as easy as sending attachments via an email client. In both cases you still have to navigate to where the attachment is and click it to select it. And you can just as easily send as many attachments as are allowed via a contact form. So there is no extra work for the user to type text or send attachments via a form if it's coded up properly.

[ralph.m]

All fair enough, but I gave up trying to convince clients not to include a clickable email address along with a form, as they seem to find it's expected ... and nowadays that seems fair enough to me. Meh, these days with the spam capturing of GMail and the like, I'm not so bothered by the potential spam, either.

[markbrown4]

There's nothing wrong with using mailto: for email address links. That is the reason they were created.

[tunnil]

There's nothing wrong with using mailto: for email address links..........

Thats not really true.

Did you read what I posted earlier? Is any of it not true?

You shouldn't use mailto: to send emails. For starters, it assumes the user has an email client installed on their device. If they haven't, then it won't work and they won't be able to send the email.

The info you fill in a form is exactly the same as what would be required in the email client, so there is no extra work or input for the user. Sending the email server side will work 100% of the time. Sending it client side will work in only some cases, so I will never use mailto: on a contact page.

[tunnil]

All fair enough, but I gave up trying to convince clients not to include a clickable email address along with a form, as they seem to find it's expected ... and nowadays that seems fair enough to me. Meh, these days with the spam capturing of GMail and the like, I'm not so bothered by the potential spam, either.

ok no problem. We can just agree to disagree on this one

[markbrown4]

You shouldn't use mailto: to send emails. For starters, it assumes the user has an email client installed on their device. If they haven't, then it won't work and they won't be able to send the email.

Desktop operating system always come with an email client, Android / iOS have email clients as well.
Which browsers / devices are you referring to?

[ralph.m]

You shouldn't use mailto: to send emails. ... it assumes the user has an email client installed on their device.

No, it doesn't assume anything. It just provides an option for those who can make use of it. Users of devices like iPad won't be able to upload attachments via a form, so you can never be 100% sure what you provide will be usable. You just have to do your best.

[Stevie D]

You shouldn't use mailto: to send emails. For starters, it assumes the user has an email client installed on their device. If they haven't, then it won't work and they won't be able to send the email.

If you want users to be able to send you emails 100% of the time, then you need to send the email server side. If you're using PHP, you can use its mail() function to send emails.

There are undoubtedly advantages to using a form, but equally there are advantages to giving a mailto link. For example:

• A significant minority of users are incapable of typing their email address correctly. I regularly get an 'undeliverable bounce' when I respond to emails that have arrived through a contact form. Sometimes the mistakes are easy to spot, but there are plenty more that need clairvoyance to correct, so those people don't ever get a reply, and won't know why. If the message comes from their configured mail client, that's virtually guaranteed to have the correct reply email address on.
• A lot of people prefer using a mail client to a contact form:
  
  • They can use formatting, spell check etc to get the message right
  • They aren't constrained typing into a tiny box where you can only see three or four lines of text at a time
  • If the web page fails when they send a contact form (not at all uncommon, especially on mobile devices!) there's a good chance they've lost everything. It's much less likely that a mail client will crash. If the SMTP connection fails, the message won't have been lost
  • They've got confirmation that the message has been sent (it's in the sent items folder), a permanent record of what they wrote and they know where the message has been sent to.

The ideal answer is to have a mailto link and a contact form, which allows everybody to contact you in whichever way they find easiest. If you're only going to have one then it should usually be a contact form, but there's a very good case for having both and no real downside apart from a possible increase in spam. (That said, I've been obfuscting email addresses with @ instead of @ for years and not noticed any spam coming through on those accounts)

[Barry360]

Thanks everyone for their help, I've got a lot to look into.
Barry