Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] <search> HTML element (Issue #714)

Thank you, @scottaohara for the correction and once again I appreciate your professionalism. I apologize for the careless wording. What I've meant is what you've said. I've reworded to: "opposed to adding form functionality to the `search` element", does that work for you?

And I'm also sorry for being so critical, but saying the same more politely was just ignored...

You've summarized your POV very succinctly. I'd like to put the alternative POV besides it for a whole picture:

> [the OG proposal] can also achieve the exact same functionality

Same, but not exactly: there are subtle, hard to notice differences in features, such as the [long-dormant bug]( https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/5811#issuecomment-961781730 ) of two landmarks announced. These are unexpected, frustrating and hard to get fixed due to relatively low attention to these areas. The "completely unrelated functionality could break" [sentiment]( https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/5811#issuecomment-998679272 ) applies here equally: "understanding why it suddenly doesn't work [might be] very hard." The alternative solution avoids these pitfalls.

But the [developer experience]( https://kaleidea.github.io/whatwg-search-proposal/#motivation ) is different. This is very nuanced and its importance depends on personal values and biases. It is noted that the original proposal does not give any importance to this, not even mentioning these developer needs, which I believe does not meet the [new features guideline]( https://whatwg.org/faq#:~:text=Evaluate%20how%20well%20each%20of%20the%20remaining%20solutions%20address%20each%20use%20case%20and%20how%20well%20they%20meet%20the%20requirements. ).

Adding an extra element adds unnecessary topological complexity that increases the possibility of developer mistakes and might break selectors. As such the OG proposal will only serve SPA developers, others will be divided about using it.

The OG proposal focuses on meeting one notional goal - mapping an ARIA role to an HTML element - and ignores what would give meaningful functionality to authors. As one developer [expressed](https://twitter.com/AmeliasBrain/status/1437942737647509504): "why would an author ever use this new element? Using a `<form role="search">` gives you significant functionality beyond the ARIA semantics."

Although very little user research was done, [it suggests]( https://kaleidea.github.io/whatwg-search-proposal/#:~:text=Optional%3A%20Clarification%20notes-,Requests%20for%20this%20feature,-tweet%20%2D%20%E2%80%9CUsing%20a ) this is a common sentiment.



-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/714#issuecomment-1034718856
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/714/1034718856@github.com>