- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 10:45:00 +0200
- To: "Dave Raggett" <dsr@w3.org>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: "Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer" <sebastian@dreamlab.net>, public-html@w3.org
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 10:47:44 +0200, Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> wrote: > On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Ian Hickson wrote: > >> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer wrote: >> >>> XForms Transitional [...] introduces an expression syntax, Web Forms >>> 2.0 does not. >> >> WF2 doesn't, because it has not been shown how it could work. We spent >> significant time and resources trying to find a way to make it work. > > I think you owe it to the Web to try a little harder [...] I think Ian is one of the last persons to "owe" something to "the Web". I think it's quite a rude statement given what he's done for it to date. > [...] > >> The 'relevant' feature is available in the proposed HTML5 specs today, >> as noted above. > > It is obviously tempting to identify relevancy with disabled, but that > would be to miss an opportunity to support wizards such as you find on > online ordering sites (including Apple's) where you are taken through a > sequence of choices with material irrelevant to the current state hidden > from view. For this we need to be able to > hide fields but to do so in such a way that their values are still > submitted as part of the form. This is exactly what is catered for by the feature pointed to in the HTML5 proposal. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Saturday, 28 April 2007 08:45:20 UTC