[whatwg] <input type="text" accept="">
mattraymond at earthlink.net
Fri Jun 9 12:33:50 PDT 2006
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> If you just give some media type it's very unclear
> what the particular side effects of such a media type would be.
No more unclear that the potential side effects of |class|, given the
existence of microformats.
> it's unclear what text/html would mean for things like syntax
> highlighting that are mentioned here given that you mostly edit a
> snippet of it and not a whole document.
Hmm. We may need a fragment MIME type or something similar, like
"x-fragment/html". I don't see what baring that has on syntax
highlighting, though. The MIME type would, however, be confusing with
regards to possibly triggering a WYSIWYG editing feature. My suggestion
would be that <input type="text"> and <textarea> always be for
text-based editing regardless of the MIME type, but this shouldn't
prevent the use of type-specific macros and syntax highlighting.
> For spell checking you might want to provide an external dictionary
> file, because you think the UA might not support the language you
> accept input in or you're using some really special terms not commonly
While the idea of supplying additional works for spell checking would
be nice (especially in forums that deal with specific topics that tend
to have their own vocabulary), I don't see the utility of enforcing the
use of a specific language via a vocabulary list. If you really want to
enforce the use of a language, I would think the |lang| attribute makes
more sense. Using a list of vocabulary words would just be a pointless
hack since you can't reasonably expect the UA to prevent submission
based on spelling. If submission was suppressed, the first time you'd
use a person's name in a text field, the submission would be blocked
until you removed it.
More information about the whatwg