LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 15.5

Help for HTML-WG Archives


HTML-WG Archives

HTML-WG Archives


View:

Next Message | Previous Message
Next in Topic | Previous in Topic
Next by Same Author | Previous by Same Author
Chronologically | Most Recent First
Proportional Font | Monospaced Font

Options:

Join or Leave HTML-WG
Reply | Post New Message
Search Archives


Subject:

Re: Input areas in <select> & <option>

From:

Joe English <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Fri, 9 Dec 94 22:50:47 EST

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (42 lines)




Peter Flynn <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > an OPTION, which can't be right (should allow %flow; minus #pcdata,
> > right?).
>
> I would say no... only straight text should be allowed in an <option>.
>
> But suppose I want italics in my option, or I want to make the option
> words explanatory by making them a link to something else?

If an <OPTION> element has no VALUE attribute, the default
is to use the element's content for the value. It's unclear
what HTML markup inside a 'name=value' pair should mean.

So even though this might make sense:

    <OPTION value="foo bar">Would you like <i>foo</i> and <i>bar</i>?

this does not:

    <OPTION>Would you like <i>foo</i> and <i>bar</i>?

Clearly, the second case should be illegal. That makes
the first case illegal too.

(Unless we want to change the de facto semantics of form
values from "textual data" to "HTML fragments". I don't
think that's desirable.)


Reason #11 why forms are broken. Is there any
hope of throwing them out and starting over?)


--Joe English

  [log in to unmask]




Back to: Top of Message | Previous Page | Main HTML-WG Page

Permalink



LISTSERV.HEANET.IE

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager