W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > January 2001

Re: Onsubmit analogue needed for A elements

From: Clover Andrew <aclover@1VALUE.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 11:07:49 +0100
Message-ID: <5F78AA062F6AD311A59000508B4AAF6D092C16@PCS02>
To: "'www-html@w3.org'" <www-html@w3.org>
David Woolley <david.woolley@bts.co.uk> wrote:

> Like many things, the horse has probably already bolted, so one would
> end up with onclick and onactivate being the same (or one calling the
> other)

I like the idea of the default action for onclick being to call
onactivate (or onfollow?); it seems more orthogonal to me. The same
goes for buttons, links, etc., so that onclick could work the same
through every HTML element, only being called on an actual click.

However orthogonality doesn't have a lot of weight with UA authors
- actually they seem to avoid it wherever possible ;-) - and the added
functionality (being able to distinguish a link followed through
clicking and through other activation) is probably not useful enough
to bear the change.

Incidentally, I would very much like to see javascript: URLs explicitly
banned. As far as I can see there's *nothing* they can do that couldn't
be better done with an event, and they've been responsible for dozens
of browser security bugs. A URL is supposed to be represent the
location óf a document, not a command to execute on the current document.

-- 
Andrew Clover
Technical Support
1VALUE.com AG
Received on Monday, 15 January 2001 05:14:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:45 GMT