[whatwg] several mail addresses in input type email?

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 14:20:22 +0000 (UTC), Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Edmund Lai wrote:
> >
> > OK, here is what I mean.
> >
> > Just like style can be defined in a stylesheet or inline, datatype can
> > be defined in a type definition or inline. [...]
> >
> >   <simpleType name="multipleOfTen">
> >     <restriction base="integer">
> >       <pattern value=".*0"/>
> >     </restriction>
> >   </simpleType>
> >   <input id="input1" name="input1" type="multipleOfTen" value="20" />
> >   <input id="input2" name="input2" type="multipleOfTen" value="40" />
> 
> This doesn't seem to be simpler than what the draft current suggests:
> 
>   <input name="input11" type="integer" step="10" value="20">
>   <input name="input11" type="integer" step="10" value="40">
> 

You missed the point. When you need to change the definition of the
datatype, you only need to change it once in the type definition, you
don't need to change it all over the places in the web document.

> 
> >>> Then we can have list and union of datatypes.
> >>
> >> If that is the only reason to use XML Schema datatypes, there are
> >> definitely better ways to achive that goal. As I have pointed out, the
> >> XML Schema datatypes have a large number of problems which would make
> >> importing them into HTML much more work than it is worth, IMHO.
> >
> > I have been working on this using JavaScript, I really don't see it
> > being a lot of work. Besides, why reinvent the wheel?
> 
> When the wheel is a 300-ton, carbon-bonded, triple-alloy, tapered spoke
> mega-wheel with nuclear-powered locomotion, and all you actually want is a
> little wooden circle, it is usually best to reinvent it. :-)
> 

You are assuming that you only need to go across the room, best of
luck when you need go on a freeway or over the desert.

> 
> > > > We can define a datatype once and use it in different places of the
> > > > web page.
> > >
> > > Could you give an example of how this would work?
> >
> > The example above shows how this would work.
> 
> I don't understand the benefits of what you are proposing. It would
> slightly simplify the life of those wanting to edit documents for which
> they already have schemas, at the cost of massively increasing the
> complexity for implementors, for whoever writes the test suite, for me (as
> the spec editor), and for anyone who tries to learn how it works.
> 

You can not see benefit of user defined datatype? What can I say.

> 
> >   <simpleType name="listOfUnions">
> >     <list>
> >       <simpleType>
> >         <union memberTypes="date integer"/>
> >       </simpleType>
> >     </list>
> >   </simpleType>
> 
> What's the use case for things like this?
> 

A book example of union datatype is that you have shoe sizes that can
be in inches, as well as S, M, L, XL.

> 
> >   <simpleType name="UnionOfLists">
> >     <union>
> >       <simpleType>
> >         <list itemType="date"/>
> >       </simpleType>
> >       <simpleType>
> >         <list itemType="xs:integer"/>
> >       </simpleType>
> >     </union>
> >   </simpleType>
> 
> Could you explain how a UA would work out what UI to render for a control
> that claimed to be of this type?
> 
> 

What is UI of a datatype that has pattern in it? Does that mean that
we should not have patter? For datatype where no obvious UI makes
sense you just have a text field whose data is verified to conform the
datatype.

> 
> --
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
>

Received on Thursday, 15 July 2004 14:35:39 UTC