W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > June 2006

[whatwg] <input type="text" accept="">

From: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 12:40:15 +0200
Message-ID: <20060609124015.943ohhog747408gs@webmail.annevankesteren.nl>
Quoting "L. David Baron" <dbaron at dbaron.org>:
> On Friday 2006-06-09 01:49 +0000, Ian Hickson wrote:
>> I don't think it's an option because:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> ...gets out of hand very fast.
>
> It may be out of hand (although I don't think it is), but it's much
> easier for authors and implementors to understand, and much more likely
> to be interoperably implemented, than what you're proposing.

I tend to agree. If you just give some media type it's very unclear  
what the particular side effects of such a media type would be. Also,  
it's unclear what text/html would mean for things like syntax  
highlighting that are mentioned here given that you mostly edit a  
snippet of it and not a whole document.

For spell checking you might want to provide an external dictionary  
file, because you think the UA might not support the language you  
accept input in or you're using some really special terms not commonly  
used.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Friday, 9 June 2006 03:40:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:27 UTC