[whatwg] Comments to Web Forms 2.0 downloaded 2004-09-18 (HTML
mpt at myrealbox.com
Mon Nov 22 03:07:44 PST 2004
On 22 Nov, 2004, at 9:16 AM, Mattias Waldau wrote:
> All I want is to be able to send a receipt that looks exactly like the
> webpage, and I cannot see why that should be forbidden.
Straw man. It's not forbidden; it just isn't easy to do, because it
shouldn't be easy to do, because it's a bad idea. In a well-designed
human system, good things should be easy and bad things should be hard.
As Mikko said, generate a PDF (or a PNG, even) if you want a receipt
looking like the original form. What, that's too hard? Good, then the
system is working as it should.
> And how can you say "This is poor UI." This is a religious statement
Not really. It's quite measurable if you have enough money, time,
people, and recording equipment. In the absence of those things we use
heuristics, things like "it's a bad idea for two things with very
different purposes to look exactly the same".
> and you should not be the judge on design principles of web forms.
Well, someone has to be. Someone has to decide what HTML 5 will and
will not include, which involves making judgements about what should be
easy and what should be hard. Someone has to decide that there won't be
an attribute for letting menus have scrollbars, and that there won't be
a <dial> element, and that there won't be a readonly attribute for
checkboxes, et cetera.
If you think Ian should not be that person, you could start your own
working group, and persuade the powers that be at Apple, Opera, and the
Mozilla Organization that they should listen to you instead of him. But
it would be considerably easier just to persuade Ian that you're right
and I'm wrong on this issue.
> If you really think that, you should remove the readonly property for
> ordinary text boxes too.
I wrote "text controls are the only controls that have an
understandable manipulable-but-not-editable state". I don't see how I
could have made that much easier to understand, even if I'd known it
was going to be republished.
> You should look at your design principles for the standard. The
> standard should be as simple as possible. The number of exceptions
> should be low. Having readonly everywhere is much simpler than having
> it everywhere except .....
GUI controls are not a symmetric system. The same attributes do not
apply to everything, and the existence of the readonly attribute only
for text fields is just one example of this. (Another example is that
individual tabs should never be disabled.) Spec simplicity is an
important factor, but not the *only* factor in making HTML 5 documents
as useful and usable as possible.
More information about the whatwg