[whatwg] Suggestion: Implementation of Tabbed Forms
mattraymond at earthlink.net
Tue Aug 17 18:30:50 PDT 2004
Ian Hickson wrote:
>>>At the moment the spec says it would be:
>>> <h1>Exclusive Section 1</h1>
>>> <h1>Exclusive Section 2</h1>
>>I presume there is a mechanism for selecting a specific section. If so,
>>would there be markup that would serve a function similar to a VB
>>tabstrip? Will there be a markup solution to selecting a section?
> The above is not a tabbed system, it's just a list of mutually exclusive
That is hinted at in my previous comments.
> Tabs are not mutually exclusive, they are just an unordered
> group of related sections that are usually shown such that only one is
> visible at any one time.
Why do we need semantic mutual exclusion at all? It seems to be some
kind of semantic justification of the presentational value of having a
group of sections where only one can display at a time. On a practical
level, just how useful is non-presentational mutual exclusion in markup?
> Anyway, the spec currently has a separate section for tabs, which says
> that the tabbed version of the above would be:
> <h1>Section 1</h1>
> <h1>Section 2</h1>
Quick note: I have to say, I don't like the header tags being
treated as tag labels. There are cases where we've done something
similar, but only when absolutely necessary. I'm a little concerned that
we're getting too clever with our markup rather than having a
> The name <tabbox> will probably be changed to <group>. See the spec for
> better examples. (Graceful degradation as your example had is possible
> too, since non-section elements in the tabbox are ignored.)
My <tabstrip> is actually more powerful, because it allows tabs to
be used separately from the sections concept. For instance, the
<tabstrip> could be used with frames:
<tab for="section1.htm" target="main">Section 1</tab>
<tab for="section2.htm" target="main">Section 2</tab>
<tab for="section3.htm" target="main">Section 3</tab>
could keep tabstrip even if they decide to pass on <section>.
>> I actually kinda like the page metaphor. I presume there is a reason you
>>rejected this? (Other than the obvious fact that the idea of pages within
>>pages of an HTML document is a little strange.)
> Yeah. They're not really pages. You could have several of these at once.
What is the motivation for passing on the <deck> of <cards>
metaphor? To presentational in nature?
More information about the whatwg