- From: Nils Dagsson Moskopp <nils-dagsson-moskopp@dieweltistgarnichtso.net>
- Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 23:18:06 +0100
Am Dienstag, den 28.10.2008, 23:03 +0100 schrieb Philipp Serafin: > This seems to overlap with the "@placeholder" proposal. Maybe both > proposals could be merged somehow? > > Ideas: > a) Don't include :default but instead define :invalid so that it won't > be set as long as the placeholder is visible; make an easy rule into a complicated one to cater to an unknown use case. yeah. way to go. </sarcasm> fact: invalid content is invalid. i'd use javascript to change the element class from "never given focus" to "had focus" using onclick in your case. > b) get rid of the placeholder attribute and use :default instead; :default (or :unchanged, or whatever you want to call it) in itself sounds good. however, as i understand it the proposed placeholder is to confer semantic content, thus some pseudocontent-trickery (with <label> ?) will probably be needed to properly separate semantic and presentational content.
Received on Tuesday, 28 October 2008 15:18:06 UTC