On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 23:32:46 +0200, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, TAMURA, Kent wrote:
An element is a candidate for constraint validation if
1. it is a validatable type,
e.g. true if input type=number, false if input type=reset
2. has no disabled attribute,
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, TAMURA, Kent wrote:
An element is a candidate for constraint validation if
1. it is a validatable type,
e.g. true if input type=number, false if input type=reset
2. has no disabled attribute,
3. has no readonly attribute,
4. inside of a form element,
The Chrome bug report is here:
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=45640
The bug there is that Chrome is filling in a control that isn't visible,
and, even worse, that it is filling it with a value that the user couldn't
himself enter manually. That's a bug (two bugs in fact),
I remember an article that stated that required was used 29 times more
often than mandatory in instructions and specifications (WWWeb pages
were mentioned as being part of the search source).
Mandatory implies that there may be reprisals for failure to comply,
because, and, secondarily, such
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 10:41 PM, Peter Kasting pkast...@google.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 10:16 PM, TAMURA, Kent tk...@chromium.org wrote:
There are some objections against omitting invisible controls from form
validation. However, it is a real issue with existing sites and users
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 07:41:40 +0200, Peter Kasting pkast...@google.com
wrote:
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 10:16 PM, TAMURA, Kent tk...@chromium.org
wrote:
There are some objections against omitting invisible controls from form
validation. However, it is a real issue with existing sites and
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Ola P. Kleiven wrote:
The following sites have workarounds in Opera's browser.js to allow form
submit:
airgreenland.com (using required on hidden elements)
barnesandnoble.com (using required on visible elements that are supposed to be
empty on submit...)
Il giorno 14/giu/2010, alle ore 12.40, Ian Hickson ha scritto:
Incorrect use of required in HTML4-era documents also seems to be the
common problem Chrome ran into -- at the risk of starting a bikeshed
discussion, does anyone have any good suggestions for alternative names?
I believe
On Jun 14, 2010, at 3:40 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Ola P. Kleiven wrote:
The following sites have workarounds in Opera's browser.js to allow form
submit:
airgreenland.com (using required on hidden elements)
barnesandnoble.com (using required on visible elements that
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 08:44:09 +0100, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Agreed on both accounts. Both these suggestions add a lot of
complexity to the platform and we should avoid it if at all possible.
To the extent that if there is lots of broken sites out there because
they happen to use
There are some objections against omitting invisible controls from form
validation. However, it is a real issue with existing sites and users can't
submit such forms at all though they can submit it with non-HTML5 browsers.
My conclusion is it's better to disable interactive form validation for
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 10:16 PM, TAMURA, Kent tk...@chromium.org wrote:
There are some objections against omitting invisible controls from form
validation. However, it is a real issue with existing sites and users can't
submit such forms at all though they can submit it with non-HTML5
-Original Message-
From: whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org [mailto:whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org]
On Behalf Of Tab Atkins Jr.
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 5:55 PM
To: João Eiras
Cc: TAMURA, Kent; whatwg; Ian Hickson
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Form validation against invisible controls
On Thu
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Garrett Smith dhtmlkitc...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/3/10, TAMURA, Kent tk...@chromium.org wrote:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/association-of-controls-and-forms.html#constraint-validation
If one of the controls is not being
An element is a candidate for constraint validation if
1. it is a validatable type,
e.g. true if input type=number, false if input type=reset
2. has no disabled attribute,
3. has no readonly attribute,
4. inside of a form element,
5. has non-empty name attribute, and
6. not inside
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 8:16 AM, TAMURA, Kent tk...@chromium.org wrote:
An element is a candidate for constraint validation if
1. it is a validatable type,
e.g. true if input type=number, false if input type=reset
2. has no disabled attribute,
3. has no readonly attribute,
4. inside
On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 16:16:00 +0100, TAMURA, Kent tk...@chromium.org
wrote:
An element is a candidate for constraint validation if
1. it is a validatable type,
e.g. true if input type=number, false if input type=reset
2. has no disabled attribute,
3. has no readonly attribute,
4.
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 8:42 AM, João Eiras jo...@opera.com wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 16:16:00 +0100, TAMURA, Kent tk...@chromium.org wrote:
An element is a candidate for constraint validation if
1. it is a validatable type,
e.g. true if input type=number, false if input type=reset
On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 08:54 -0700, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 8:42 AM, João Eiras jo...@opera.com wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 16:16:00 +0100, TAMURA, Kent tk...@chromium.org wrote:
An element is a candidate for constraint validation if
1. it is a validatable type,
Oh, I'm sorry. I have found a sentence about visibility in the draft.
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/association-of-controls-and-forms.html#constraint-validation
If one of the controls is not being
renderedrendering.html#being-rendered
(e.g. it has the hidden
On 6/3/10 11:42 AM, João Eiras wrote:
Would be easier to tell that user agents might chose to ignore form
controls that they do not *paint* if that is possible for the UA to
implement.
Gecko doesn't necessarily paint form controls that are outside the
viewport, yet ignoring those seems wrong.
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 12:11 PM, TAMURA, Kent tk...@chromium.org wrote:
Oh, I'm sorry. I have found a sentence about visibility in the draft.
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/association-of-controls-and-forms.html#constraint-validation
If one of the controls is not
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 3:48 PM, Aryeh Gregor
simetrical+...@gmail.comsimetrical%2b...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 12:11 PM, TAMURA, Kent tk...@chromium.org wrote:
Oh, I'm sorry. I have found a sentence about visibility in the draft.
On 6/3/10, TAMURA, Kent tk...@chromium.org wrote:
Oh, I'm sorry. I have found a sentence about visibility in the draft.
Where?
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/association-of-controls-and-forms.html#constraint-validation
If one of the controls is not being
24 matches
Mail list logo
