[whatwg] whatwg Digest, Vol 33, Issue 90
ian at hixie.ch
Tue Oct 28 12:07:01 PDT 2008
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
> FROIDURE Nicolas wrote:
> > - 2 attributes for <textarea> : max (like other fields) and type
> > (to specify a text mime type for the content edition bbcode, html,
> > xhtml, xbbcode etc...). It will be a good way to improve the quality
> > of the web by improving the quality of user interventions.
> Already done, see maxlength and type at:
> Although as I've pointed out before, MIME types are not a sufficiently
> specific tool: they don't differentiate between different versions of
> HTML, can't suggest microformats, can't differentiate between full
> documents and fragments, and so forth. Also BBCode, XBBCode, and the
> various Wiki dialects don't even have MIME type. (Mind you, WHATWG could
> actually submit some MIME type registrations to make type work a bit
> better for the real web.) So this area still desperately needs more
I've dropped type="" (actually accept=""), as discussed in the past few
weeks, because there was no interest from user agents, it didn't seem to
solve a problem that wasn't solved by class="", and it has a series of
difficulties (such as those described above).
> > - 1 attribute for code : type.
> Not done really. One option would be to add microformats to the Wiki for
> different languages, I suppose. If you were to do so, I suggest
> including version numbers. PHP4 should not necessarily be highlighted
> the same as PHP5. Otherwise one might as well use type and MIME types,
> just as for <script/>, although I suspect many languages lack MIME
I enourage people to use the class attribute for this (or
data-something="" if they want to us this for input to a script).
> > - maybe an attribute for em and strong. Something like "degree"
> > and a numeric value to notice the emphase degree of the sentences.
> Whenever this semantic problem is raised, two alternatives are proposed:
> either add an attribute to <em/> and <strong/> or specify the semantic
> meaning of nesting <em/> and <strong/>. Web Applications 1.0 currently
> goes for the second option:
> Question for the editor: how many <em/> equal one <strong/>?
They are orthogonal as defined now.
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006, FROIDURE Nicolas wrote:
> Maybe that the DTD syntax could be use. The official DTD for W3C
> standards and a personal DTD for other languages. In all cases, i think
> that bbcode, wiki and other 'easy' web languages with disappear when
> browsers will include real WYSIWYG editors.
That's an interesting but somewhat expensive idea.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg