W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > February 2014

Re: [whatwg] <input type=number> for year input

From: David Dailey <ddailey@zoominternet.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 22:57:35 -0500
To: "'Michael[tm] Smith'" <mike@w3.org>, "'Ian Hickson'" <ian@hixie.ch>
Message-ID: <000f01cf2d26$b9d9a750$2d8cf5f0$@net>
Cc: 'whatwg' <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, 'Jonathan Watt' <jwatt@jwatt.org>
<input
[magnitude|quantity|quality|time|thing|person|place|action|epistemic|quantif
ier|URI|anaphora|mediatype|direction|influence|...]=attribute-value-expressi
on-with-micro-syntax>

with all appropriate cross-cultural studies underlying each attribute-value.

I am reminded of the Navajo verb system, in which epistemic values
(certainty), influence (transitive/intransitive), deixis (this/that/yonder),
and quantifiers (unique, none, all, some) are not strictly orthogonal. Nle`i
dzilh bits'i`i d'shighan : the unique and well-known hill over yonder,
beyond it there is my house. Were the hill or the direction not well known,
then it might be expressed differently (as I seem to recall). It's maybe a
bad example since bits'i`i could be viewed as a preposition, but heck, it's
been decades since I had a Navajo-speaking hitchhiker in my car (and we
seemed never to agree on etymology)!

What sorts of things might people want to say to us as web-folk? Are not
those all the possible types of input?

Cheers
D


-----Original Message-----
From: whatwg-bounces@lists.whatwg.org
[mailto:whatwg-bounces@lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Michael[tm] Smith
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2014 7:31 PM
To: Ian Hickson
Cc: whatwg; Jonathan Watt
Subject: Re: [whatwg] <input type=number> for year input

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, 2014-02-18 23:59 +0000:

> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014, Jonathan Watt wrote:
...
> > I wonder if it would be that bad to have a 'year' type to compliment 
> > the 'month' and 'day' types...
> 
> This has come up a few times, but so far the use cases have not been 
> compelling enough. This is probably the most compelling use case, but 
> even here, I don't know that it's that compelling.
> 
> I would be interested in hearing more about the locales where not 
> using separators even for four digits is bad/suboptimal. If it wasn't 
> for those, I would say that just not using separators for four-digit 
> numbers would be an easy and effective solution.

The following info seems relevant -

  http://www.thepunctuationguide.com/comma.html#numbers
  "Most authorities, including The Associated Press Stylebook and The
Chicago
  Manual of Style, recommend a comma after the first digit of a four-digit
  number. The exceptions include years, page numbers, and street addresses."

To me that appears to be a strong argument that formatting of years is in
fact clearly an exception, and that's compelling enough to warrant having a
type for them separate from the normal number type (in which four-digit
numbers would instead have a separator, to follow existing longstanding
conventions).

  --Mike

- --
Michael[tm] Smith http://people.w3.org/mike -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=gY28
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2014 03:58:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:16 UTC