[whatwg] Suggested changes to Web Forms 2.0, 2004-07-01 working

[Ian Hickson]

On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, George Lund wrote:
> 
> Your suggestion [Jim] in ciwah was that we have
> 
> > <object name=datetime classid="urn:wtfwg:datetime">
> > Day:<input name=day>
> > Month: <input name=month>
> > Year:<input name=day>
> > Time:<input name=time>
> > </object>
> 
> My problem with this that now we have to overload the object element for every
> extension we want to make to HTML.  Ultimately everything becomes an object,
> which isn't very "semantic".

I strongly agree with that. Object's semantic is that it brings in an 
external resource; using some sort of classid hack that way is, IMHO, 
semantically bogus.


> But I do agree that the more traditional HTML-like approach would have been
> not to try to force the existing input element to do everything by means of
> the type attribute.  Perhaps a new element should have been made, like this:
>
> <datetime_input name="mydatetime">
> Day:<input name=day>
> Month: <input name=month>
> Year:<input name=day>
> Time:<input name=time>
> </datetime_input>
> 
> I'm not saying my choice of names is any good but maybe the idea is helpful?
> If it was already rejected then apologies.

It's a reasonable idea; I think we should see how the current proposals 
are received by Web authors before changing it again, though. Maybe for WF3?

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'