IE clicking a javascript button

[Petarr]

hey guys, i need some help with my script..

I am trying to press a javascript button using internet explorer.

here the html code for the button:

<div class="newaccount" id="create_acct_tmp">

<div class="login_button">

<a class="small_button" onclick="javascript:createacct();"><span>Cliquez ici pour créer un compte</span></a>

<input type="submit" style="display:none" />

</div>

</div>

i tried everything but can't find a solution..

Can anyone help me with this?

Thanks in advanced!

[PsaltyDS]

Did you try _IELinkClickByText()?

Just so you know, there is nothing special about the link just because it calls a script onclick. It doesn't have a name or id value set, so you would have to find it by text value, 0-based index, or in relation to another object, like second generation child of the div id="create_acct_tmp" element.

[corgano]

I know this is an old post, but if someone finds this post searching google, one possible solution is creating and sending a MouseEvent, to trigger the javascript attached to the button. Hope this helps

[BrewManNH]

This thread is 6 years old, no one cares anymore.

[JLogan3o13]

@corgano Stop resurrecting old threads.

[corgano]

Answering old posts with solutions has three benefits:

1. It answers recurring questions, like this one, that have been asked many, many times.
2. It puts the answer in topics that show up on top  when you search eg google. Posting the answer in a newer thread will show up lower down on google (because it has been less visited / linked to) and therefore take more digging to find an answer and help less people
3. Because old posts are found sooner than new posts (at least on google) it means more people will find the answer here before posting a duplicate question. This reduces the duplicate questions on the forums. (Side note: a duplicate question linking system would be awesome!)

My goal is not to necro a thread, but to help people find solutions for their questions. I'm just trying to help future searchers who, like I, find these old posts first to find the answers for their question.

I asked about posting solutions for old questions before just to make sure it was alright. This was in regards to another topic linked here, but the same principle applies:

Sorry for any inconvenience.

[mLipok]

@corgano could you point me to this specyfic @Melba23  post ?
I never seen it before, and I want to read the context.

 

[corgano]

  On 10/7/2017 at 8:33 PM, mLipok said:

@corgano could you point me to this specyfic @Melba23  post ?
I never seen it before, and I want to read the context.

 

Expand  

It was in a PM, Melba23 was a moderator i was more familiar with at the time, so I messaged them directly. 

  Reveal hidden contents

I have an odd question. I know that bumping old topics is usually taboo, but recently I ran across this post

 

'?do=embed' frameborder='0' data-embedContent>>

 

Despite it being old, I too have had problems using netsh

While looking for an answer to my problem, I found this post about the SAME problem, but posted a while ago - and unanswered

I have since found a solution to the problem.

 

The question is should I reply to the thread with the solution? What about the next person to have the same problem? They will run across the same question I did, to find no answer. If I have the answer to a problem, and someone else might have the same problem later on like I did, should I leave the answer for the next person to find? Does the taboo of bumping an old post outweigh the usefulness or leaving an answer for people to find

A discussion about this could be beneficial to the forum and future posters, but is not related to this topic. Which forum would be the most relevant to discuss this? Should I make a thread (in Chat? or another forum?) for a more public discussion? I'd personally love to discuss answering old posts and a system to mark posts "duplicate" (a la superuser, stack-exchange, etc) so repeated questions can be both grouped together and pointed to a common correct answer.