[whatwg] WF2 part 1-3

Ian Hickson ian at hixie.ch
Sun Aug 22 12:37:19 PDT 2004

On Wed, 4 Aug 2004, fantasai wrote:
> >  > 
> >  > For the following control, the allowed values are fifteen seconds
> >  > and two tenths of a second past the minute, any minute of the day,
> >  > i.e. 00:00:15.2, 00:01:15.2, 00:02:15.2 ... 23:59:15.2:
> >  >
> >  > <input type="time" min="00:00:15.20" name="t">
> > 
> > Really? You are saying that each value fragment (hour, minute, second,
> > second fragment) is evaluated independently? Wouldn't it be more
> > useful to consider the value as one where 'min="00:00:15.20"' means
> > [that all times after 00:00:15.20 are valid]?
> I agree with this.

I don't understand what exactly it is that you are agreeing to.

> >  > When a control has a list attribute, the list of author-specified
> >  > autocompletion values shall be given by the list of elements that
> >  > would be found by first calling getElementById() ...
> > 
> > This is the start of a difficult description. Why not just say that 
> >   "The value of the list attribute is the ID of a datalist element which
> >   contains a list of author-specified autocompletion values".
> > 
> > If this is too simple and the complex description is necessary, I
> > suggest softening it by stating that the list attribute "points to" a
> > list of values, rather than "specify a list of values"
> The complex description is necessary, but may not need to be quite so
> algorithmic.
>   The list attribute of a form control can be used to specify the ID of a
>   datalist element that contains a list of author-specified autocompletion
>   values. If the attribute is present and gives the ID of an (X)HTML datalist
>   element in the document, then the UA must compile the autocompletion list
>   for the form control from all of the datalist's non-disabled descendant
>   (X)HTML option elements, using either the value of each option's 'value'
>   attribute (if present) or, (if not present) the concatenation of its textual
>   contents as an autocompletion value. If, however, the autocompletion value
>   is the empty string or is not a valid value for the control's type, then
>   that value must instead be ignored. The UA may use an option's label
>   attribute to annotate the corresponding autocompletion value in its
>   interface.
>   [Insert any error-handling confusion here.]

I prefer the current version. It's clearer, IMHO. (It's not the same as 
the text that the above was intended to replace.)

> There's a lot of complex and twisty text in the spec to get around the 
> namespace juggling. I think it should all be defined (and thereby 
> confined) in a section at the beginning so it doesn't convolute already 
> complex sentences throughout the spec. Something like
>   In this specification, an (X)HTML element is one which is
>     - a regular element in an HTML document
>     - an element in the XHTML namespace (http...)
>   An (X)HTML attribute is one which is
>     - a regular attribute in an HTML document
>     - a local attribute of an element in the XHTML namespace (http...)
>     - an attribute in the XHTML namespace on an XML element not in the
>       XHTML namespace

That's much to generic. It would end up making a lot of attributes apply 
to all elements when that is emphatically not what we want.

Only a small number of attributes should be global (in the namespaces-in- 
xml sense). I'd rather deal with these on a case-by-case basis.

In WF3 (and maybe in WA1), we could consider writing some generic text of 
this kind for all the global attributes.

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

More information about the whatwg mailing list