- From: Douglas Rand <drand@sgi.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 15:14:16 -0400
- To: elmert@ipoline.com
- CC: "Chris Wilson (PSD)" <cwilso@MICROSOFT.com>, "'Lee Daniel Crocker'" <lee@piclab.com>, walter@natural-innovations.com, www-html@w3.org, www-style@w3.org
Steve Cheng wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Jul 1997, Chris Wilson (PSD) wrote: > > > Actually, the point of the BUTTON tag is to allow rich content (e.g., > > images and marked-up text) in a button - which INPUT is incapable of, > > since it is not a container. > > True, but the element should not be named "BUTTON" or after any visual > element. I propose a DIV like element, but it can be included in a form and > "submitted". I don't get it. If the element is a pressable BUTTON, then why bend over backwards to hide this? Even in an interface rendered for the blind, the functionality of the element is going to exist (albeit in a different form). I don't see anything wrong with BUTTON. If you want something more general, have a container tag called CONTROL with a TYPE= to get the semantics of the control. It could be like INPUT except for being a container. Doug -- Doug Rand drand@sgi.com Silicon Graphics/SSO http://reality.sgi.com/drand Disclaimer: These are my views, SGI's views are in 3D
Received on Thursday, 17 July 1997 15:23:21 UTC