[whatwg] Web Forms 2.0 comments

On 26 Jun 2004 at 10:31, Sander wrote:

> The main reason for this is found in content management systems (as I
> create them), where roughly up to 95% of all input elements will
> potentially contain user-submitted data. Always in the value attribute
> of course. 

I think I'm missing something here. What is the use case for ever 
processing the "value" attribute to parse it for [id] - type things - 
could it not be excluded by default?

In fact I can not think of any reason to ever process anything except 
"name", "id" and "template" attributes. I don't have as much 
experience with writing and processing template/repeat functionality 
as Ian and yourself. If there is an obvious reason why one would want 
to insert a repetition block index into a "value" attribute please 
enlighten me.

> Let's see - related to this, I've seen a proposal floating by to not do
> [id]-replacement at all. I strongly oppose that. Right now I can drop in
> the template, <repeat> elements and add/remove buttons in pretty much all
> applications where I'd want to use them, to vastly simplify the
> client-side code, and I wouldn't have to change a single line of the
> backend. It fits perfectly.

Did you see my alternative "autoname" attribute suggestion?

-- 
Hallvord Reiar Michaelsen Steen
hallvors at online.no / www.hallvord.com

Received on Saturday, 26 June 2004 03:09:41 UTC