- From: Avi Bryant <avi@beta4.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 14:05:36 -0700
On Jun 25, 2004, at 1:51 PM, Hallvord Reiar Michaelsen Steen wrote: > On 25 Jun 2004 at 11:01, Avi Bryant wrote: > >>> I do agree that the [id] stuff is somewhat dodgy. I really am at a >>> loss of >>> how to do a better solution, though. And it does work quite well. >> >> In other words: it's a useful hack. No argument there, as long as we >> agree that it would be nice to find something that *isn't* dodgy. > > This complexity seems to be introduced simply because one wants to > choose where in a "name" or "id" value the index goes. <snip> > To go with the "nested repetition" example in the spec there would be > no way of telling whether > > <input name="planetmoon135"/> > > was the 35th moon of the 1st planet or the 5th moon of the 13th > planet. Instead of simply appending the number, append a "." and then the number. So you'd get <input name="planetmoon.13.5"> This follows the precedent set by <input type="image">. I think this makes your indexposition attribute unnecessary. I like it much, much better than the [id] expansion. Avi
Received on Friday, 25 June 2004 14:05:36 UTC