- From: Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 22:15:13 +0800
- To: Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@googlemail.com>
- CC: WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
(12/06/26 21:53), Jonathan Kew wrote: > On 26/6/12 14:28, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu wrote: >> Speaking for end users, wouldn't it be very confusing if what's sent >> over the wire is different from what's shown to the user (when script is >> disabled)? Since we are likely to have more 'text-transform' features in >> the future, I kind of think we should not allow authors to trick users >> like this. >> >> Otherwise, I don't see a use case of applying 'text-transform' to input >> controls. > > ISTM that this is not a reason to disallow styling input controls. Would > you argue against applying font-family, for similar reasons? Not so sure... I think there are good use cases to allow users to specify font-family for input controls, but "text-transform" is a bit different, see below. > An author wishing to "trick" users could just apply a font that has a > non-standard character/glyph mapping. Although you have a point here, "text-transform" is especially annoying because some browsers (tested in Chrome 19) copies the transformed content so you can't verify the content in the input control by, say, copying to the URL bar to see what that is. Although that can be used as an argument against copying transformed content, for majority of use cases of 'text-transform', I think copying the transformed content is indeed better for an end user. Cheers, Kenny
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2012 14:15:46 UTC