On 5 Jun 2007, at 19:22, Paul Novitski wrote:
The FIELDSET definition could easily have included:
(INPUT|SELECT|TEXTAREA|BUTTON)+
or:
(%formctrl)+
But it doesn't.
And if it did then the fieldset couldn't contain elements that add
extra semantic information about the form
At 6/6/2007 01:13 AM, David Dorward wrote:
On 5 Jun 2007, at 19:22, Paul Novitski wrote:
The FIELDSET definition could easily have included:
(INPUT|SELECT|TEXTAREA|BUTTON)+
or:
(%formctrl)+
But it doesn't.
And if it did then the fieldset couldn't contain elements that add
Paul Novitski schreef:
documents be written according to the prose of the specification and
not just the machine readable components of it.
The DTD almost always errs towards the liberal, it is expected that
That's a very interesting assertion and gets right to the heart of
many of the
.
Cheers
Jackie
- Original Message -
From: Ben Buchanan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 12:36 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Re: Use of Fieldsets other than in form?
Can fieldsets only to be used in forms or can they be used to group any
sort
On 5 Jun 2007, at 3:34 PM, Jackie Reid wrote:
The fact the validator passed it also seemed to me to say that it
could be used in this way. If fieldset can't be used this way why
does it pass validation?
Forgot this point: valid doesn't mean correct, or sensible. It's really
easy to write
Lucien Stals
For a comparison, the w3schools site defines fieldset as The fieldset
element draws a box around its containing elements. And that's the
complete sentence. Note no mention of form controls.
I leave it to others to debate the authority of the w3schools
site, and
it's a
On 5 Jun 2007, at 6:13 PM, Patrick Lauke wrote:
No need to debate it...w3schools is a cr*ppy resource, full stop.
That's an opinion, which of course you're entitled to (happens that I
agree with you) - but I couldn't resist taking a look. And right there
on their Home page:
W3Schools
June, 2007 10:06 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: [WSG] Re: Use of Fieldsets other than in form?
Nick Gleitzman
Forgot this point: valid doesn't mean correct, or sensible.
It's really
easy to write code that validates, but which is semantic rubbish. The
Validator is a great
On 5 Jun 2007, at 04:19:38, Lucien Stals wrote:
I in fact did quote the entire sentence.
Yes, but you then dismissed the words controls and labels as being
irrelevant.
For a comparison, the w3schools site defines fieldset as The fieldset
element draws a box around its containing
Nick Fitzsimons wrote:
But there's then little point in communicating this fact to a list about
Web Stanbdards, as you are clearly advocating something which is in
breach of said standards.
Steady on, Nick. If he wasn't here you wouldn't be able to tell him this
- it's exactly the right
On 5 Jun 2007, at 14:57:44, Barney Carroll wrote:
Nick Fitzsimons wrote:
But there's then little point in communicating this fact to a list
about Web Stanbdards, as you are clearly advocating something
which is in breach of said standards.
Steady on, Nick. If he wasn't here you wouldn't
Barney Carroll wrote:
...a deceased squirrel foetus
Wow. What an image.
N
___
omnivision. websight.
http://www.omnivision.com.au/
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Nick Gleitzman wrote:
Barney Carroll wrote:
...a deceased squirrel foetus
Wow. What an image.
N
___
I wondered if you kept one on hand, in your office, for purposes of
validation?
--
Bob
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk
Kick the auto responder on that persons email or ban them, it's becoming
annoying now!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Designer
Sent: 05 June 2007 19:08
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Re: Use of Fieldsets other than
Designer wrote:
Nick Gleitzman wrote:
Barney Carroll wrote:
...a deceased squirrel foetus
Wow. What an image.
N
___
I wondered if you kept one on hand, in your office, for purposes of
validation?
I use it mostly for accessibility tests.
The fur gets a bit
C'mon guys, we all know what the proper use of a Fieldset is.
Does anyone feel that this is going on forever?
So can we use it to group textual information?
Of course we can. We can drive with our feet if we wanted to, doesn't mean
its a good idea.
] On
Behalf Of Jackie Reid
Sent: 05 June 2007 06:35
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Re: Use of Fieldsets other than in form?
Hi all respondees
Ben Said
...it depends if you're talking about page layout or actual content -
ie. is your business name, logo etc being used
The FIELDSET element allows authors to group thematically related
controls and labels. Grouping controls makes it easier for users to
understand their purpose while simultaneously facilitating tabbing
navigation for visual user agents and speech navigation for
speech-oriented user agents. The
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ben Buchanan
Sent: 06 June 2007 02:28
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Re: Use of Fieldsets other than in form?
The FIELDSET element allows authors to group thematically related
controls
Yes, I feel that way.
It's like beating a dead...squirrel...
Ely Solano wrote:
C'mon guys, we all know what the proper use of a Fieldset is.
Does anyone feel that this is going on forever?
So can we use it to group textual information?
Of course we can. We can drive with our feet if we wanted
Quick question for you lot.
Can fieldsets only to be used in forms or can they be used to group any sort of
related information together (ie: business name, short description, logo and
link).
thanks
Jackie
***
List Guidelines:
The HTML 4 specs say...
The FIELDSET element allows authors to group thematically related
controls and labels...
While controls and labels refer to form controls, the fieldset
itself can contain anything. My opinion would be that the important part
of the use of fieldset is group thematically
On 6/5/07, Lucien Stals [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The HTML 4 specs say...
The FIELDSET element allows authors to group thematically related
controls and labels...
While controls and labels refer to form controls, the fieldset
itself can contain anything. My opinion would be that the important
Jackie Reid wrote:
Can fieldsets only to be used in forms or can they be used to group any
sort of related information together (ie: business name, short
description, logo and link).
What's wrong with using a DIV? I'd say leave fieldsets alone...they're
specifically intended for forms, and
Jackie Reid wrote:
Can fieldsets only to be used in forms or can they be used to group any
sort of related information
From memory the W3C validator doesn't complain if you do use them outside
a form, but they are designed specially to group thematically related
controls and labels and you can
On Jun 5, 2007, at 10:19 AM, Jackie Reid wrote:
Quick question for you lot.
Can fieldsets only to be used in forms or can they be used to group
any sort of related information together (ie: business name, short
description, logo and link).
In HTML 4.0, the description of fieldset can be
Sent: 05 June 2007 02:42
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Re: Use of Fieldsets other than in form?
The HTML 4 specs say...
The FIELDSET element allows authors to group thematically related controls
and labels...
While controls and labels refer to form controls, the fieldset itself
Can fieldsets only to be used in forms or can they be used to group any sort
of related information together (ie: business name, short description, logo
and link).
The spec's wording is a little vague but by my reading of it, fieldset
and legend are only intended for form controls. Beyond the
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Re: Use of Fieldsets other than in form?
The HTML 4 specs say...
The FIELDSET element allows authors to group thematically related
controls
and labels...
While controls and labels refer to form controls, the fieldset
itself can
contain anything
On 5 Jun 2007, at 11:41 AM, Lucien Stals wrote:
...the fieldset itself can contain anything...
Huh? Where in the spec does it say that?!
And why would you want to use something for which it's not intended? It
would surely, at best, be semantically confusing.
Some legacy code I just
On Tuesday 05 June 2007 13:49:45 Nick Gleitzman wrote:
Similarly, why use a fieldset when a simple div will do?
I agree with you about what the spec says, but I don't think I agree the spec
in this area is particularly good.
The reason I have is that I may (and often do) want an interface
Lucien Stals wrote:
But a DIV is void of semantic.
Hello Lucien,
I'm pretty sure a fieldset should only be used to group form controls. But
others have written that. The reason I'm responding is because of that
written above. A div does have semantic value in that it's a division or
I almost cannot believe I'm joining this conversation but...
Come on. It's pretty obvious what the fieldset tag is intended for,
just as the legend tag. Picking apart the descriptions written by
people to describe what they are in exact legal translation is rather
pointless. Certainly
33 matches
Mail list logo
