[whatwg] Markup for Web Forms 2.0 that still requires discussion

Dean Edwards dean at edwards.name
Tue Jul 6 14:29:42 PDT 2004

Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Tue, 6 Jul 2004, Jim Ley wrote:
>>>I fail to see how <object> would make sense here. Could you expand on your
>><object name="combo" classid="urn:web-forms2-combobox">
>>  <label> or select from the list:</label>
>>  <select name="combo">
>>    <option>Item 1</option>
>>    <option>Item 2</option>
>>    <option>Item 3</option>
>>  </select>
> We couldn't use urn: (at least, not without registering a URN namespace).
> But it's an interesting idea. What do others think?
i was going to respond to this email anyway (before i noticed my name 
with a question mark after it (below)). this whole <object 
classid="urn:..."> thing is kind of interesting. although i intuitively 
like it (it's so general) - it has zero semantic meaning (it's so 
general). because of ian's comments below i'm going to test it....

> because in IE, the markup you gave above has no <object> element in the DOM.
> This would probably also make making a backwards-compatible version
> significantly harder (Dean?).
ian. you are right. i was unaware of this but after testing have 
discovered that <object> elements do not appear in IE's DOM. i've no 
idea what the origin of this thread is any more but i suspect we're 
still on about <select edit>. i prefer the current solution over this 
one (regardless of IE's inadequacies) because of it's additional 
semantic value. despite that, this technique introduces all sorts of 
possibilities. custom widgets anyone?


More information about the whatwg mailing list