Alexey Feldgendler wrote:
Check spelling:
( ) Never
(*) As the page author suggests
( ) Always
But that really brings out the foolishness of the idea. I can imagine a
user looking at that option and thinking Duh - how on earth is the page
author ever going to know when and how I want spelling
Gervase Markham wrote:
Alexey Feldgendler wrote:
Check spelling:
( ) Never
(*) As the page author suggests
( ) Always
This isn't actually strictly necessary at all - one can imagine the
setting being on a per field basis with the author value representing
the default and the user being able
James Graham wrote:
The only sensible use case that has been suggested so far is for online
email apps which allow 1 email addresses in an input type=text -
in this case none of the text will be recognized by the spellchecker vs.
an input type=text which contains an email subject line, which
The Web Applications 1.0 spec says:
5.7.3. The StorageItem interface
Items in Storage objects are represented by objects implementing the
StorageItem interface.
interface StorageItem {
attribute boolean secure;
attribute DOMString value;
};
I would like to
On Jun 25, 2006, at 11:59 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
...
But realistically, browsers won't allow the user to easily override
it if they want to, because any interface for doing that would be
absurd.
...
* Status bar icon/text that indicates if spell checking is on or
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Gervase Markham wrote:
interface StorageItem {
attribute boolean secure;
attribute DOMString value;
};
I would like to suggest the the secure attribute be an integer rather
than a boolean, initially with 0 meaning insecure, and 1 meaning
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Quoting Gervase Markham [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If this whole attribute rigmarole is merely about trying to distinguish
between an input type=text containing email addresses and one
containing a subject line, then it seems like a storm in a teacup to me.
Either people have
HTML5 brings back the |start| attribute on ordered lists. This allows a
list to semantically start with a number other than one. It seems like
the major use case for this is to split lists up, so that a single list
is marked by multiple ols.
Would it therefore make sense to allow named start
