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

[whatwg] repetition model

From: Dean Edwards <dean@edwards.name>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 19:25:19 +0100
Message-ID: <40DB1C8F.8060406@edwards.name>
Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, Malcolm Rowe wrote:
>>Personally, I'm not so sure. The logic required to support the
>>repetition model is extremely complex, compared to the rest of the
>>document, so it should need to provide a significant benefit to us
>>(users, authors) for it to be included.
> It looks complex because it is new and all described in the spec. But
> actually it's not really complex, it's just described in a detailed way.
> I'm sure submission is a lot more complicated if you look at the actual
> details to the same level.
i can vouch for this. i knocked up a prototype of the repetition model 
and although the wording is kinda scary it does fall into place when you 
code it. i also agree that form submission is far more difficult to 

>>It sounds like a good idea in theory. For example, all those order-entry
>>applications could use it instead of providing a large input form with
>>'add/delete' buttons. But in reality, where would it be used? I've been
>>trying to think of examples, and I'm having trouble.
last year i implemented a timesheet application on a corporate network 
of 30,000 users. it has the concept of adding rows to the timesheet 
based on a hidden template row. my current client wants a cross-browser 
dynamic HTML table with add and delete buttons. these examples are too 
obscure to detail but they want six of them.

>>I guess it boils down to this: it's really complex, so show me a
>>compelling use case. I'm not against it, just not particularly sure
>>whether I should be 'for' it.
for a client side web developer the repetition model is the best thing 
in the spec.
(but i think the <repeat> tag should be a PI ;-)

Received on Thursday, 24 June 2004 11:25:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:34 UTC