- From: Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1997 22:18:17 -0400
- To: MegaZone <megazone@livingston.com>, www-html@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 04:36 PM 09/07/97 -0700, MegaZone wrote: >Once upon a time Scott Matthewman shaped the electrons to say... >>I do think, though, that the insertion of script events into tags should be >>discouraged more firmly, to be replaced by binding from a script in the >><HEAD> element. Individual event attributes in tags should be deprecated, >>to be replaced by a SCRIPT attribute, in much the same way as the STYLE >>attribute can incorporate style changes. > >You must have a way to bind event handlers to elements - no way around that. >All the event handlers define are the crossover points between HTML and the >scripting language. Note that the language itself is NOT defined - only >the event handlers. But many of the event handlers are media-specific, which is unnecessary as well as inconsistent with the overall message of HTML 4.0. There should be ways to provide event handlers inline, embedded, or externally, just as with style sheets. Inline, a more generic attribute like SCRIPT (or perhaps EVENT) would be consistent with the style sheet approach, and would allow new, language-dependent event handlers to be developed without having to update HTML standards. The syntax of the SCRIPT value would be language-dependent, but I could imagine something like the following: <INPUT TYPE=text NAME=email SCRIPT="onChange: validate(this); onFocus: tip('e.g., liam@htmlhelp.com');"> or perhaps <INPUT TYPE=text NAME=email SCRIPT="onChange { validate(this); } onFocus { tip('e.g., liam@htmlhelp.com'); }"> For embedded or external scripts, the event handlers would be better defined in the scripts themselves, allowing authors to apply scripts to multiple pages without having to add attributes like onClick, whose media dependencies should make them deprecated in HTML 4.0. >You can inline scripts, sure - you can also inline style sheets. But more often than not an external style sheet makes more sense. Inline styles are not often appropriate, especially since they implicitly apply to all media. >Note that you can already >use the SRC attribute on a SCRIPT element to call an external script. This syntax makes little sense given the following alternative: <LINK REL=Script HREF="yourscript.js" TYPE="text/javascript" TITLE="Form validation"> The use of an empty element seems much more sensible than a container for external scripts. >Sure it will be abused - but making the rules tighter will not stop that, and >will only hamper those who want to do decent work. A lot of people avoid using client-side scripting because of the enormous number of bugs and inconsistencies across browsers. Now would be a good time to decide on a better way of providing scripting hooks in HTML. New methods, unsupported by the old, buggy browsers, will allow authors to use scripts with worrying about being bitten by bugs (until browsers actually start supporting HTML 4.0 :)). -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQB1AwUBM8RGaA/JhtXygIx1AQEh5QL/bU9fkVCc0kQq6YR029yXCMg1wSZbO9h5 dzZP+kSIFCDFRf6ImBzPhlJcfw9a4tYspCwi+yzp3u6otVr3lFVMmZJ2TD5X2wQJ EuGw7qDAkpWEVlLoSnwsLEWO9DK6ZdI2 =9iYW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Liam Quinn =============== http://www.htmlhelp.com/%7Eliam/ =============== Web Design Group Enhanced Designs, Web Site Development http://www.htmlhelp.com/ http://enhanced-designs.com/ ====== PGP Key at http://www.htmlhelp.com/%7Eliam/pgp.html =====
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 1997 22:21:32 UTC