WebBrowser1.Document.All("").Value using Inet instead?
I'm making an application that requires that I post data in a textbox on a website. I got the whole thing working with a webbrowser control, but I really want to make it faster and better by using Inet. I played around and did research for a method that would allow me to use WebBrowser1.Document.All("textbox").Value = "x" with Inet instead of a webbrowser, but to no avail.
If anyone could help me it would be greatly appreciated. :wave:
Re: WebBrowser1.Document.All("").Value using Inet instead?
Webbrowser and Inet are totally different types of control and are interacted with totally differently.
My suggestion is to stick with WebBrowser, unless you want to radically change how you are doing everything.
However, if you wish to look into it further, inet may allow you to visit a specific address and send data using a specific URL. This doesn't work for all sites though, which is where the issues arise...you have to send it with the header data, and I am sure you see where this is going...the complicated route :-)
Re: WebBrowser1.Document.All("").Value using Inet instead?
Oh, whoops, I forgot to mention...check out Static's link in my signature below...you will find information about ways of using the HTML objects library without webbrowser, doing exactly what you want and faster :-)
Re: WebBrowser1.Document.All("").Value using Inet instead?
I don't think Inet can address a Web Page in the sense of modifying a textbox on that page. You can use Inet to get a page but how to use Inet to then make changes to that page; I don't think so.
So, you need to stay with the WebBrowser control and/or incorporate the Microsoft HTML Onject Library for more robust manipulations of the page. For example, WebBrowser cannot address nameless objects (elements) nor can it address hyperlinks. For this you need to use the HTML Object Libray. You can use both the WebBrowser and the HTML Object Library as complementary to each other or you can use each one by it self.
Re: WebBrowser1.Document.All("").Value using Inet instead?
(looks around)
Is it me, or is there a parrot around here? :)
Re: WebBrowser1.Document.All("").Value using Inet instead?
Not exactly what I was looking for. I looked around and found something called HTTPwrapper, but I can't write to sites with that either. I would stick with the webbrowser control if there was some way to cancel a connection (so if a user would be logged in to the site through my program, then the connection cancel would also log them out, and I would be able to go back to the sign in page easily).
If someone knows how to do THAT with a webbrowser (no, not webbrowser1.stop) then I'd love to hear it :)
Re: WebBrowser1.Document.All("").Value using Inet instead?
No, WebBrowser is not meant for that type of site manipulations. WebBrowser is exactly what it says it it, a browser; it is not a tool to use to connect to sites, do something, then log off. It can be done if the site you navigate to has those features on the page (like a button to login) then the page has some text fields so you can enter data and a button to log off. But this is all done in HTML and done on a site's Web Pages.
Re: WebBrowser1.Document.All("").Value using Inet instead?
I don't think I understand fully what you are actually trying to do, but if you know what you're doing with VB you may find using winsock to be the best way to do it. Winsock is usually trial and error playing around until you get it right, but it's the most flexible and powerful way :-)
With winsock, you get to play around with headers and cookies, the most important part of any website interaction involving user login :-)
Re: WebBrowser1.Document.All("").Value using Inet instead?
What about HTTPwrapper...I heard that I could use that somehow. If you're unfamiliar with it, google it, it's somewhere around on the first result page.
Re: WebBrowser1.Document.All("").Value using Inet instead?
Very complicated with alot of faults. Tried it but didn't think it was worth the trouble. You might like it however. I used Winsock instead.