- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:47:47 -0800
- To: "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
- Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> wrote: > 2013-02-12 19:26, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> The fact that authors today have a random assortment of displays for >> the exact same feature (credit card expirys) is something that would >> be great to fix, not bemoan as a loss to the world. ^_^ > > Well, maybe, from some point of view, but is there really something to be > fixed, and is it probable that <input type=month> would fix it? > > I have seen many input widgets for such data and used them a lot in test > purchases. In general, the more advanced they try to be, the more annoying > they get. I can type "03/15", or whatever reads in the card, rather fast. > But if I have to pick things up from dropdowns or click on something in a > calendar picker, I surely hope I won't need to do this a dozen more times. > > What are the odds that browser vendors will implement <input type=month> in > a simple manner that allows fast typing as one input method? Rather small I > think. > > This would make the most obvious, and perhaps the most common, use for > <input type=month> a case *against* it. Credit card expiry month is best > handled with a text input field, with suitable checks on the input string. > There may be *other* cases where graphic widgets are good when selecting a > month, but authors can use libraries for such purpose, and I don't see any > particular reason why this should be standardized across pages but not > across browsers. This argument appears to apply equally well to all the date inputs, and perhaps most of the other new inputs. I believe it's wrong. * Most people don't type very fast. We email-happy people are an exception. For most, clicking on things is faster and easier. * Experience shows that most authors appear to prefer a pair of dropdowns for selecting month and year, rather than a text input. Might as well move closer to author expectations. * Text inputs are permanently subject to the vagaries of whatever arcane syntax the author happened to want (or didn't want, but accidentally required when they miswrote their regex) - Do I just type two numbers with a slash? Or do I use a dash? Or a space? What if I use a slash surrounded by spaces? Or do I use the month name? Long or short name? Two digit or four digit year? - while visual inputs put your options in front of you and avoid all of that. > Even if <input type=month> became widely supported, many, probably most, > authors will keep using libraries or their own code, because they get > consistent look and feel and functionality across browsers. Some authors > would be misled into using <input type=month> for any month input because > that's "logical" or "semantic" (as it is in a sense), but this will create > questionable user experience in many common cases. This same argument keeps getting deployed against type="date". We'll see what actually happens. I expect (and deeply hope) that the ease of use of the built-ins will win the day, once they're supported on every browser sites expect their visitors to use. ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 12 February 2013 17:48:32 UTC