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

[whatwg] Re: Web Forms 2: Altenative to <select editable>

From: Malcolm Rowe <malcolm-what@farside.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 19:48:52 +0100
Message-ID: <courier.40DB2214.000031D5@mail.farside.org.uk>
Ian Hickson writes:
>> As you point out, we do also have the option of using both: a text box
>> paired with a select, in some form. While that provides the right
>> functionality in legacy clients, it'd be quite complex to author and use
>> (at the server-side), and I'd imagine, very complex for UA authors to
>> support.
> Yeah, I'm not sure it's worth the effort.

The functionality in general, or pairing an input and select specifically? 
If the latter, I agree. If the former, well, it'd be a pity, but if we can't 
come up with something acceptable .. 

>> Just for the record, what I eventually ended up suggesting was something
>> you didn't mention. It worked out to something like this: 
>>
>>    <input type="email" name="test" data="...">
>>     <option>foo</option>
>>     <option>bar</option>
>>    </input> 
>>
>> .. but I also noted several problems with that approach.
> 
> That wouldn't be parsed that way in HTML (tag soup) parsers. 
> 
> Since <input> has no end tag, the <input> and <option> elements there
> would be siblings, and you'd end up with browsers doing all kinds of
> strange things. 
> 
> It could work in XHTML-only pages, but we'd need a solution in the
> meantime for HTML4 pages.

Yeah, complete brokenness in existing clients _was_ the main problem I noted 
:) 

Regards,
Malcolm
Received on Thursday, 24 June 2004 11:48:52 UTC

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