On Tue, 21 Jul 2009, Oldřich Vetešník wrote:
> Dne Fri, 26 Jun 2009 07:17:17 +0200 Ian Hickson napsal/-a:
> > On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Oldřich Vetešník wrote:
> > > Dne Tue, 02 Dec 2008 11:31:07 +0100 Ian Hickson napsal/-a:
> > > >
> > > > Well, in the snippet above, the following seems adequate:
> >
Dne Fri, 26 Jun 2009 07:17:17 +0200 Ian Hickson napsal/-a:
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Oldřich Vetešník wrote:
Dne Tue, 02 Dec 2008 11:31:07 +0100 Ian Hickson
napsal/-a:
>
> Well, in the snippet above, the following seems adequate:
>Instructions
>Type in dd-mm-yyy format
> ...and t
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Oldřich Vetešník wrote:
> Dne Tue, 02 Dec 2008 11:31:07 +0100 Ian Hickson napsal/-a:
> >
> > Well, in the snippet above, the following seems adequate:
> >Instructions
> >Type in dd-mm-yyy format
> > ...and the custom error message should be set from script, us
Dne Tue, 02 Dec 2008 11:31:07 +0100 Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napsal/-a:
Well, in the snippet above, the following seems adequate:
Instructions
Type in dd-mm-yyy format
...and the custom error message should be set from script, using
addCustomValidity(). How is that not acce
On Tue, 11 Nov 2008, Oldřich Vetešník wrote:
> Dne Mon, 10 Nov 2008 21:50:37 +0100 Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napsal/-a:
> > >
> > > Instructions
> > >
> > > Type in dd-mm- format
> > > Must be a valid value (if error is true)
> >
> > This seems excessively complicated and I'm not convi
Dne Mon, 10 Nov 2008 21:50:37 +0100 Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napsal/-a:
Instructions
Type in dd-mm- format
Must be a valid value (if error is true)
This seems excessively complicated and I'm not convinced there is really
a problem to solve here. Just using plain text seems enough
On Wed, 5 Nov 2008, Oldřich Vetešník wrote:
>
> It would be awesome if something like this would be possible:
>
> Instructions
>
> Must be a valid value
You can use for this purpose at this point.
> And to further enhance this futuristic view:
>
> Instructions
>
> Type in dd-mm- format
Dne Wed, 05 Nov 2008 16:32:41 +0100 Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napsal/-a:
What's wrong with?:
Instructions
Must be a valid value
Hello, let me just react on this,
first of all I don't mind using this solution, I want to share an opinion
though:
This solution
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008, Keryx Web wrote:
>
> A simple use case: It is getting quite common to have the following:
>
> Instructions
>Must be a valid value
>
>
>
> But presentationwise it should be displayed like this:
>
> Instructions [ (input) ] Must be a valid value
What's wrong with?:
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Keryx Web <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 10:31 PM, Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:
>>>
>>> What's wrong with:
>>>
>>> Instructions
>>>
>>> Must be a valid value
>>>
>>> Can an input not have 2 labels?
>>
>
> Thomas Broyer skrev:
>
>> Or even:
>
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 10:31 PM, Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:
What's wrong with:
Instructions
Must be a valid value
Can an input not have 2 labels?
Thomas Broyer skrev:
Or even:
Instructions Must be a valid
value
Both of these suggestions lack the precision, the semantics and the
f
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 10:31 PM, Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:
> Keryx Web wrote:
>>
>>
>> Instructions
>> Must be a valid value
>>
>>
>>
>> But presentationwise it should be displayed like this:
>>
>> Instructions [ (input) ] Must be a valid value
>
> [snip]
>
> What's wrong with:
>
> Instruc
Keryx Web wrote:
Now it has been a while since anyone proposed a new element...
But I can't remember if this has been discussed in any detail...
So here it comes!
I suggest that we investigate if an errormsg element could be useful. It
should be a sibling element to label and have a similar f
Now it has been a while since anyone proposed a new element...
But I can't remember if this has been discussed in any detail...
So here it comes!
I suggest that we investigate if an errormsg element could be useful. It
should be a sibling element to label and have a similar for-attribute.
A
14 matches
Mail list logo
