- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:32:33 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7711 --- Comment #3 from Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com> 2009-09-29 13:32:32 --- Some differences are editorial, because of sentence construction and the need to keep sentences grammatical. They still led me astray when I was doing the comparisons. (Thus my preference for a bulleted list, which would have made the comparisons more obvious.) >> I would also suggest clarifying the aria-valuenow instructions. >> As best I can tell, it is equal to the value iff the value can >> be parsed as a number. (This was one place where the slight differences in wording confused me -- I was trying to figure out whether or not they also implied differences in edge cases for parsing.) >> Otherwise, (only for a range?) it is the default value, >> if that can be calculated. Given the level of parallelism, I think (but am not certain) that it would be worth making it even more parallel by adding an explicit note that there is no default value for progressbar or number. >> Otherwise, it is undefined? > Otherwise, it is not specified at all. So the value of <input type=number>six</input> is implementation-defined; browsers are allowed to interpret it as 6 (or 43.7) if they wish, and compatibility is not expected? I would prefer that it be explicitly the value undefined (or at least null), but admit that my intuition could well be wrong here. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 29 September 2009 13:32:47 UTC