W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > July 2004

Javascript for degradation [ Re: [whatwg] Suggested changes to Web Forms 2.0, 2004-07-01 working ]

From: Jim Ley <jim.ley@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 22:55:18 +0100
Message-ID: <851c8d31040720145569f60161@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:09:36 -0400, Matthew Raymond
<mattraymond at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Jim Ley wrote:
> > you can provide the enhancement in other ways, such as inline script
> > within the OBJECT element.
> 
>    Wouldn't such an inline script require <script>? That would mean for
> every <object> element, you'd require the web author to remember to put
> in a <script> element.

Not "remember" after all nothing is lost if they don't, it just
degrades to the really good fallback you get without javascript,
unlike with the previous proposals where you end up with nothing but a
text box, without any information on how to fill it out.

>    No, I don't think you did. All I saw was the contents of an <object>
> element wrapped in a <div>,

It's pretty trivial extension...  Unless this is taken seriously by
people then there's no point wasting time - I think OBJECT has enough
going for it without the javascript to be considered, simply because
the fallback on the non-javascript solution with the input
type=datetime etc. is so woeful other solutions need to be considered
first.

What's the problem finding the form element?  the form element is the
form element of the form controls, (or the ancestor FORM element if
you don't want any form controls in your fallback)

>    Of course. We haven't written the HTC yet, 

Yet, everyone is confidently trumpeting as the one solution, despite
the fact there are no public WF2 implementations useing HTC's if
you're so confident of the solution, bring it to the table - don't
criticise me for not bringing my javascript when there are no HTC
solutions.  Yes I'll comment on it - I hope you'll all comment on mine
too if I produce some.

>    Clearly, if <object> is not better than <datalist>, 

If it was clear, I don't concede that it is in the slightest.  In any
case you've ignored the weaknesses of datetime etc. where OBJECT much
more clearly has strong advantages - also the fact that the
consistency OBJECT brings, and the lack of namespace arguments and new
element introduction means it should very much be considered ahead of
the alternatives which are much less politically dodgy - remember at
some point we need to get a good review from the W3C or other
organistation - showing how little we change of HTML 4 is a good
thing.

Object changes nothing at all, it's fully in accordance with the
extension methods of HTML and XHTML.

> Furthermore, if this code takes up so much of
> your precious time, why do you expect us to have time to do it for you?

I don't, but I don't expect to be criticised for not, time's precious,
we have to prioritise.

Jim.
Received on Tuesday, 20 July 2004 14:55:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:35 UTC