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

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

From: Alexey Feldgendler <alexey@feldgendler.ru>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 00:08:34 +0700
Message-ID: <op.tazq8kxe1h6og4@localhost>
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 23:34:00 +0700, Lachlan Hunt  
<lachlan.hunt at lachy.id.au> wrote:

>>  Enabling or disabling spell checking doesn't change the functionality  
>> of an input.

> While the core functionality of allowing the user to enter text isn't  
> changed, I'd consider spell checking to be part of the control's  
> functionality, and so disabling it would change the functionality for  
> the user.

There's nothing really bad in allowing CSS to control behavior to some  
extent. CSS is a good rule-based language, and there is a use case -- why  
not reuse the CSS engine (selectors, cascading etc)?

>> But misspelled words in an input with spellchecking enabled are  
>> underlined with a wavy red line (and the underlining style could even  
>> be changed by CSS), and that's presentation.

> Arguably, yes, but allowing authors to alter the presentation of  
> misspelled words from the UAs default settings would only introduce  
> usability problems.  Users may not easily recognise any presentation set  
> by the author as representing a missplled word.  UAs may provide a way  
> for the user to set their preferred presentation using some UA-specific  
> means, but there's no need at all for the author to have any control  
> over it.

It's not a bigger problem than is the author's ability to style  
hyperlinks. Such ability exists for years, but actually on most websites  
there are no problems with spotting links. Though authors theoretically  
can use CSS to make their sites unusable, almost noone does so.


-- 
Alexey Feldgendler <alexey at feldgendler.ru>
[ICQ: 115226275] http://feldgendler.livejournal.com
Received on Sunday, 11 June 2006 10:08:34 UTC

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