- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 19:26:55 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9624 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #2 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2010-08-24 19:26:55 --- EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: The problem is that if we strip out <option> elements with no value="" attribute, you can't reuse a <select>. In practice, you already have to do everything you describe for <select>, as far as I can tell. However, I don't feel that strongly about this. If the perf cost (presumably only an issue while a user is editing an <input> -- which doesn't seem like it'll happen often anyway) and implementation cost is really that high, then reopen and I'll simplify it. But that would make the language rather inconsistent. As it is now, you can implement <option> in a way that abstracts this out, and then <select> and <datagrid> can both use the data in the same way. -- 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 Tuesday, 24 August 2010 19:26:56 UTC