[whatwg] Re: several messages

[Ian Hickson]

On Thu, 1 Jul 2004, voracity wrote:

> Hmmm, I don't mind this. It's nicer than the first example in the sense
> that I would not have to write any JS for either WF2 UAs or legacy UAs
> under any of the use cases I described earlier (with additional
> attributes). However, the first example is much cleaner for what is
> probably the most common case.
>
> I'm not sure which I prefer. On these examples _alone_ I think I prefer
> the second (so long as WF2 _does_ submit 2 values).

The proposal was to allow both. In both, though, a WF2 UA would only
submit one value, not two. Why would you want two?


I agree with most of the rest of what you said.

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