- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 03:02:30 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Mon, 28 Sep 2009, Elliott Sprehn wrote: > > To cut myself off here, I did just find this > <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7278> > > To quote Ian: "The idea is just to provide a basic fallback that will be > acceptable in legacy browsers", but that's not really what the spec > says. > > The spec says: "The *recommended* way of giving the value is to include > it as contents of the element". (Emphasis mine) > > So the spec recommends using the textContent to specify the value, the > comment on the ticket seems to imply that's a last resort for legacy > browsers and you should really use @value. Very few of the examples use > @value though, further lending to the idea that it's best practice not > to use it. The idea is that now, during the transition period, people should use the contents of the element, so that there is fallback. > Perhaps the language of the spec needs fixing? > > At the very least, could we get an example in that big examples section that > uses a comma and @value? > ex. > <!-- Localized with comma decimal separator --> > <meter value="0.75">0,75</meter> Ok, added another example. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 6 October 2009 02:53:16 UTC