W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > November 2008

[whatwg] HTML 5 : Misconceptions Documented

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:56:47 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0811102054140.1237@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, Garrett Smith wrote:
>
> There is no note in the WF 2.0 specification, nor the HTML 4.01, nor the 
> HTML DOM specifications that an element should not be named "submit" or 
> "action" to avoid such consequences. Was this considered?

I don't think we want to limit these names, since this would be an 
unbounded set of names that made older documents non-conforming as the 
language evolved.


> What is the decision for advocating the coding practice of 
> form-as-collection?

It's convenient.


> What is the rationale for standardizing it?

Browsers support it.


> The implied expectation of the specification is that the values for 
> form.action and form.submit will be replaced by elements of the 
> corresponding name. It could be expected that an element named "length" 
> or "tagName" would create a "length" property on the form, except for 
> the fact that form.length is defined as readonly[1] in another 
> specification. What should happen in that case? Can a readonly property 
> be replaced? What is the suggested approach for submitting to an API 
> that requires a parameter named "submit" or "action"?

WebIDL will define these cases.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 10 November 2008 12:56:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:07 UTC