dolphinling at myrealbox.com
Sat Jan 1 08:54:44 PST 2005
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> dolphinling wrote:
>> Also, in the repetition model, I _REALLY_ don't like the repeat
>> attribute applying to arbitrary non-form-related elements. It seems
>> incredibly hackish to me--why should trs, ps, lis, etc. get a new
>> attribute just because forms have been updated? I'd much prefer that
>> the new attribute only apply to fieldsets, and those can be wrapped
>> around the stuff you want repeated (which is actually correct
>> semantically, too).
> That complicates it actually. For a lot of forms it is far more
> semantically correct to use multiple table rows. If you need to use
> FIELDSET with 'display:table-row' and some other CSS tricks which will
> not even work because you can not style FIELDSET properly this feature
> can better be dropped.
> However, the feature is very useful and having an attribute that applies
> to multiple elements is not that bad and can actually be quite useful to
> achieve semantically correct results.
Actually, I meant something like
<fieldset repeat='template' repeat-start='blah'>
...which I see now is invalid. I wish it weren't, though (even without
templates I think fieldset should be able to go around table rows, or
pretty much wherever else it wants), and I don't think there are many
(if any) cases where it would be more semantically correct to not have
fieldsets. The only ones I can think of are where there's only one input
that's being repeated, but that's just semantically redundant, not wrong.
<http://dolphinling.net> coming soon…
More information about the whatwg