Re: [whatwg] additional key attribute in form field
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007, Alexander wrote: i wonder why there's still no a special 'key' attribute for every form field implemented. Basically the answer is because it can already be done with name. On Fri, 6 Jul 2007, Alexander wrote: Of course, it's how I usually do this :) But I would not be against some common specified approach - especially taking into consideration some restriction on 'name' symbolset (there are much less restrictions on 'value' symbolset) We've expanded name= in HTML5 to allow basically any value. On Fri, 6 Jul 2007, Alexey Feldgendler wrote: Changing the form submission formats (that currently only allow for name/value pairs) is out of scope for WHATWG. That's not the case (indeed we had an XML format for a while), but I don't think it's necessary in this case anyway. On Sat, 7 Jul 2007, Krzysztof Żelechowski wrote: 1. Your code is old-fashioned: the identifier should be used instead of the name. It's not old-fashioned, these techniques are all valid techniques. Let's avoid putting down each other's conventions. 2. The identifier should be unique throughout the document so your code will be ill-formed. He was making up his own markup proposal, so there's no way to know if this is true or not. It appears you are making assumptions about his proposal here that are not warranted. If I understand your intention correctly, you want to submit an entire table instead of just one record a time; HTML forms clearly were not designed with that application in mind. I think you would be better off by performing an internal query on the client side---where you can refer to the form fields by numeric index rather than by identifier---and reformatting it to JSON before submission. If this is impossible, you could make a round trip to the server for each record. My experience shows that it is often the case with current implementations. That seems overly complicated; I would recommend using a key exactly as the original poster attempted, but simply using the name field and separating the key from the field name with a punctuation character. On Sat, 7 Jul 2007, carmen wrote: old-fashioned or not, the reality is most popular web frameworks are using regex hacks on the name field to squish more information in there. input name=user[35][name] value=Emmanuel it might be worth considering how they could use normal form fields without Javascript, and not require Regex in multiple places along the line. obviously another workaroudn besides regex is custom serialization and nonstandard attribute names of the input element - my preference using RDFa style predicates to describe what the field actually contains... Different people have different needs. I wouldn't characterise the use of a convention for naming input controls as a hack. Also, this shouldn't require JavaScript, it can be purely server-side logic. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Re: [whatwg] additional key attribute in form field
Dnia piątek, 6 lipca 2007 13:32, Alexander napisał:
Greetings,
i wonder why there's still no a special 'key' attribute for every form
field implemented.
Let's say I have rendered table from query result and one column could be
updateable via text field. And let's say record id field is
uniqueidentifier (not integer). I'd like to write the following:
form ...
!--- Loop query results ---!
input type=text key={id_value_here} name=quantity value=
input type=text key={id_value_here} name=quantity value=
!--- End of loop ---!
/form
and
when submitting the form and checking results on server, I'd like to know
the 'owner' of every quantity field:
!--- loop via quantity fields ---!
if (quantity.key == '----') { ... }
!--- end of loop ---!
Regards,
Alexander.
1. Your code is old-fashioned: the identifier should be used instead of the
name.
2. The identifier should be unique throughout the document so your code will
be ill-formed.
If I understand your intention correctly, you want to submit an entire table
instead of just one record a time; HTML forms clearly were not designed with
that application in mind. I think you would be better off by performing an
internal query on the client side---where you can refer to the form fields by
numeric index rather than by identifier---and reformatting it to JSON before
submission. If this is impossible, you could make a round trip to the server
for each record. My experience shows that it is often the case with current
implementations.
Chris
Re: [whatwg] additional key attribute in form field
i wonder why there's still no a special 'key' attribute for every form field implemented. 1. Your code is old-fashioned old-fashioned or not, the reality is most popular web frameworks are using regex hacks on the name field to squish more information in there. input name=user[35][name] value=Emmanuel it might be worth considering how they could use normal form fields without Javascript, and not require Regex in multiple places along the line. obviously another workaroudn besides regex is custom serialization and nonstandard attribute names of the input element - my preference using RDFa style predicates to describe what the field actually contains... the idea is making the baseline form field not require hacks..
[whatwg] additional key attribute in form field
Greetings,
i wonder why there's still no a special 'key' attribute for every form field
implemented.
Let's say I have rendered table from query result and one column could be
updateable via text field.
And let's say record id field is uniqueidentifier (not integer). I'd like to
write the following:
form ...
!--- Loop query results ---!
input type=text key={id_value_here} name=quantity value=
input type=text key={id_value_here} name=quantity value=
!--- End of loop ---!
/form
and
when submitting the form and checking results on server, I'd like to know the
'owner' of every quantity field:
!--- loop via quantity fields ---!
if (quantity.key == '----') { ... }
!--- end of loop ---!
Regards,
Alexander.
Re: [whatwg] additional key attribute in form field
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 13:32:17 +0200, Alexander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i wonder why there's still no a special 'key' attribute for every form
field implemented.
Let's say I have rendered table from query result and one column could
be updateable via text field.
And let's say record id field is uniqueidentifier (not integer). I'd
like to write the following:
form ...
!--- Loop query results ---!
input type=text key={id_value_here} name=quantity value=
input type=text key={id_value_here} name=quantity value=
!--- End of loop ---!
/form
and
when submitting the form and checking results on server, I'd like to
know the 'owner' of every quantity field:
!--- loop via quantity fields ---!
if (quantity.key == '----') { ... }
!--- end of loop ---!
The simple name/value pairs that form submission is organized in are
sufficient for expressing data structures of any complexity.
Multidimensional keys like (name, key) in your example can be expressed
through combined names:
input type=text name=quantity:{id_value_here} value=
--
Alexey Feldgendler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[ICQ: 115226275] http://feldgendler.livejournal.com
Re: [whatwg] additional key attribute in form field
The simple name/value pairs that form submission is organized in are
sufficient for expressing data structures of any complexity.
Multidimensional keys like (name, key) in your example can be expressed
through combined names:
input type=text name=quantity:{id_value_here} value=
Of course, it's how I usually do this :) But I would not be against some common
specified approach - especially taking into consideration some restriction on
'name' symbolset (there are much less restrictions on 'value' symbolset)
Re: [whatwg] additional key attribute in form field
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 14:07:10 +0200, Alexander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The simple name/value pairs that form submission is organized in are
sufficient for expressing data structures of any complexity.
Multidimensional keys like (name, key) in your example can be expressed
through combined names:
input type=text name=quantity:{id_value_here} value=
Of course, it's how I usually do this :) But I would not be against some
common specified approach - especially taking into consideration some
restriction on 'name' symbolset (there are much less restrictions on
'value' symbolset)
Changing the form submission formats (that currently only allow for
name/value pairs) is out of scope for WHATWG.
--
Alexey Feldgendler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[ICQ: 115226275] http://feldgendler.livejournal.com
