On Mon, 20 Jul 2009, Peter Kasting wrote:
Two unrelated comments.
First, it seems a bit odd to me that input type=email and input type=url
are validated (for typeMismatch problems) but input type=tel isn't. I
know it's prohibitively difficult to perfectly validate telephone number
formats
Two unrelated comments.
First, it seems a bit odd to me that input type=email and input type=url
are validated (for typeMismatch problems) but input type=tel isn't. I
know it's prohibitively difficult to perfectly validate telephone number
formats given the variety around the world, but it's also
Am Montag, den 20.07.2009, 12:47 -0700 schrieb Peter Kasting:
It seems like perhaps input type=tel could set typeMismatch if the
input contained no numeric digits at all, or maybe if it contained
characters outside 0-9, +, -, (, ), ' ', ...? Maybe the level of
validation provided by these
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net wrote:
What's with alphanumeric notation ? I think of 555-WHATWG as a possibly
valid telephone number. It might be good to have an RFC on that. Or
maybe ITU has publicly available documents on
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Peter Kastingpkast...@google.com wrote:
Two unrelated comments.
First, it seems a bit odd to me that input type=email and input type=url
are validated (for typeMismatch problems) but input type=tel isn't. I
know it's prohibitively difficult to perfectly
