[whatwg] Menus and Toolbars

[Tab Atkins Jr.]

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> To move forward on this, here are some proposals:
>
> #1: Drop <menu> and all related features. I don't think we should do this,
> but if we can't get agreement on what to implement, this is the only
> option left, so it's on the table.

I'm gonna throw out this option.  Worst case, retaining <menu> solely
for its context-menu additions is necessary - this keeps being
requested over and over again by authors, both of small and large
apps.


> #2: A design that supports context menus and menu buttons using dedicated
> markup, with support for indirect defining of commands.
>
> First, we make <menu type=""> take three values: "toolbar", which just
> means to render the element using CSS (the default value for legacy pages,
> too), and "context" and "button", which define menus. "context" menus
> would be hidden by default, "button" menus would render as a button,
> which, when clicked, shows the menu. contextmenu="" can be used to point
> to a <menu type=contextmenu>.
>
> The <menu> element in "context" and "button" modes would only have three
> elements as descendants: <menuitem> elements, <menu> elements, and <hr>
> elements. (Or maybe no <hr>s, and we do separators by using groups of
> <menu> elements without labels.) Other children are ignored.
>
> <menuitem> elements would just have a label="" attribute and, optionally,
> a command="" attribute. The command="" attribute would work as it does in
> the spec now, deferring to some existing element. When the menu item is
> selected, it would fire click on the <menuitem>, and then as a default
> action do whatever the action of the command="" is, if specified. (We can
> talk about whether to bother supporting icons in the <menuitem>, and if so
> how, especially given high-res screens, but that's a minor detail.)
>
> With type=button, CSS would apply to the <menu> and <menuitem> elements,
> maybe with a limited set of properties applying. Long term, we look to XBL
> or Web components or whatever for styling.
>
> We drop <command> entirely.
>
>
> #2a: Same as #2, except we keep <command> as a way to introduce commands
> without using existing elements.

I assume that the "button" case is meant to still support toolbars,
except that each top-level entry in the toolbar is a separate <menu>
element?  (Thus delegating the actual "toolbar" styling fully to CSS.)

> #3: We forget the non-JS case; so, the same as #2, but <menuitem> doesn't
> get a command="" attribute. We add radio menu items, checkbox menu items,
> and the like, over time, as features on <menuitem>. (Defined much like
> <command> has some of them defined today.)
>
>
> #4: We do what the spec has now.
>
>
> #5: We do what the spec has now, except we change the type=toolbar to just
> be rendered in CSS (and remove type=list, making toolbar the default).
>
>
> #6: Your idea here.
>
>
> So, implementors: Which of these would you be willing to implement? Are
> there constraints I've not thought of? Are there features that we need to
> deal with that I haven't mentioned above? Are there use cases that we
> should just abandon that could simplify the solution drastically?

I'm down with keeping the current "do nothing" behavior, and the
"context menu" behavior.  I like the proposed "button with pop-up
menu" behavior, as a better version of the old toolbar initiative.  I
have no opinion on the rest of the details, as they seem roughly
equivalent.

~TJ