ian at hixie.ch
Wed Jun 16 02:18:17 PDT 2004
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Erik Arvidsson wrote:
> Would it not be better to limit the repetition buttons to <button> since
> that would be backwards compatible. In a non-conforming user agent
> inputs with unrecognized type attributes are usually treated as
> type="text" and would therefore be a lot harder to work with. For
> <button> one can easily add an onclick (DOMActivate) and do the logic
> What is the main reason for supporting both input and button?
Both are allowed because there seemed to be a convention in HTML4 to
support both, and it doesn't seem harmful.
I've changed the spec to use <button> in the examples, but bear in mind
that the default action of <button> in legacy UAs is to submit.
Actually maybe that's a good thing. It would mean you could implement all
of this on the server side if the client side doesn't have JS enabled.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg