- 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>
- 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 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJTA/tCAAoJEIfRdHe8OkuV2aAP/iRM71IfqZtGq4RojC9iPBEe rBCMCd7X0JfqCibx+FIhXtaXoLwyqzK6ALM0I9XxHKzXhi1Ioqg67mLNif+ch8vu UNwwE/NYbjHkymspxg0N0IOQjTPcwDpra7avDjqmtzVsJImqe2nwEmKr9lfhl+NS GCu+U2f2Uoh5UTw10RAscRbODZoqbWcNboI7wGNXeavzckcaVvj7ePN9mjTty96N OmB2E+lgrlrrQXdHM2Vp5cuduPxoXUaEzOxEUc8la7P50/zgP+HW9Ultx0WC1g/3 5a1gpiuXteEdiCYbOz1sjP/XiCTMGNnUUFlWsSt8Rd/NC5tTbpM85vJsXabeLWnm 1Od4NhPHvcUAeHO+J+DtfmSDYB9G09NMAlMzFvhZyIxXlFGxGAvk5SRufvzzzk1B r9tTSFRiDsFyLIu9ILfe0ssXLpyrrq/0qV+QwAyebpBWSvewBnbEdeV5b3l4xVhc HKY9CU0/YOaJrmJ6gSVI1BB7wDE1Hpo7OwAXsAXIW7NrlLGNCj/d/ycJlBClIfrf T4ZoPxWnO2ijvp8niENZmbvU3SnNWiduWygZtwzlOUw2fNqHrR4g/PW+oo9d/qhN j97LOXwkFVM8cw4SjLaLctOxkgine96xQR8q38rwdLQ6PCmk4Bq5U12w9NkSAemR envZdVX/S7hoY3DrDzCW =gY28 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2014 03:58:14 UTC