- From: Weston Ruter <westonruter@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 12:21:27 -0700
- To: "Mihai Sucan" <mihai.sucan@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Maurice Carey" <maurice@thymeonline.com>, "HTML Working Group" <public-html@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <fb8299e10709121221t79701d77u578fbdd3472a676f@mail.gmail.com>
An equivalent to this proposed input type=emails is already possible by creating a repetition template encapsulating an input type=email, for example: <div id="emails" repeat="template"> <input name="email[emails]" type="email"> </div> <input type="add" template="emails"> By using the repetition model, authors have a specified means of bounding the number of email addresses that may be entered by specifying the repeat-min and repeat-max attributes. Weston On 9/12/07, Mihai Sucan <mihai.sucan@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello Maurice! > > Le Wed, 12 Sep 2007 20:41:34 +0300, Maurice Carey > <maurice@thymeonline.com> a écrit: > > > On 9/12/07 12:36 PM, "Mihai Sucan" <mihai.sucan@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hopefully some suggestions will still be taken into consideration. Like > >> ... input type=emails (because input type=email is too useless, *cough* > >> too ... limited). :) > > > > Why do you say that? > > I want suggestions to be taken into consideration for HTML 5 spec, even if > WF2 will be folded into the spec. WF2 can stay the same, but it's not > perfect and making improvements to it within the HTML 5 spec seems to be a > really good opportunity. It's "natural" to start the work from WF2 in HTML > 5, but that shouldn't stop just at folding the spec in. > > As for the input type=email: I believe it has a very limited set of > use-cases. The best place where web developers could have benefited from > the usage of input type=email was omitted: web mail clients. Now we are > stuck with a simple input type=email which is only usable in simple > contact forms, where the author has a single "from email address" field. > Another simple use-case is for newsletter/mailing-list subscription forms. > This issue has been previously discussed on the WHATWG list, however I > maintain my stance. [1] [2] > > > > [1] > > http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-January/008986.html > [2] > > http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-February/009614.html > > > > -- > http://www.robodesign.ro > >
Received on Wednesday, 12 September 2007 19:21:32 UTC