Re: BUTTON element

Douglas Rand (drand@sgi.com)
Thu, 17 Jul 1997 15:14:16 -0400


Message-ID: <33CE6F08.3F54@sgi.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 15:14:16 -0400
From: Douglas Rand <drand@sgi.com>
To: elmert@ipoline.com
CC: "Chris Wilson (PSD)" <cwilso@MICROSOFT.com>,
Subject: Re: BUTTON element

Steve Cheng wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 17 Jul 1997, Chris Wilson (PSD) wrote:
> 
> > Actually, the point of the BUTTON tag is to allow rich content (e.g.,
> > images and marked-up text) in a button - which INPUT is incapable of,
> > since it is not a container.
> 
> True, but the element should not be named "BUTTON" or after any visual
> element. I propose a DIV like element, but it can be included in a form and
> "submitted".

I don't get it.  If the element is a pressable BUTTON,  then why bend
over backwards to hide this?  Even in an interface rendered for the
blind,  the functionality of the element is going to exist (albeit in a
different form).  I don't see anything wrong with BUTTON.  If you want
something more general,  have a container tag called CONTROL with a
TYPE= to get the semantics of the control.  It could be like INPUT
except for being a container.

Doug
--  
Doug Rand				drand@sgi.com
Silicon Graphics/SSO			http://reality.sgi.com/drand
Disclaimer: These are my views,  SGI's views are in 3D