W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > January 2011

[Bug 10053] how about minlength? i'd like to see certain fields to have a minimum amoung of characters for validation

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 15:25:48 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1PiTjI-00020s-TU@jessica.w3.org>

--- Comment #5 from Mounir Lamouri <mounir.lamouri@gmail.com> 2011-01-27 15:25:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Note that minlength="n" is equivalent to pattern=".{n}".  Not clear if it's
> common enough to really need special handling.

No, minlength="n" isn't equivalent too pattern=".{n}". @pattern should only be
used for specific cases given that it removes all semantic.

In addition of passwords fields that require a minimum length (I guess that
would be the primary use case), minlength could be used for field that require
a specific length in association with maxlength (with maxlength and minlength
having the same value).

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 Thursday, 27 January 2011 15:25:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:31:04 UTC