Re: [WSG] Standards compliance and Autocomplete
2008/7/1 Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Lisa Herrod wrote: > >> Just wondering if there is a standards compliant way of implementing >> 'autocomplete' on forms, which I believe is proprietry...? >> > > Not tested it, but...could you inject the autocomplete="off" via javascript > to the form element? Thanks Pat, yeah that's what I thought. I wanted confirmation from smart people like you though :) > If all else fails, I'd rather have an invalid attribute (with a good > rationale why it was used) that doesn't have adverse effects (as opposed to > invalid elements, which have the potential of messing up the DOM more > dramatically) any day if it actually provides an improvement to usability. > Yeah that's what I reckon too. if all else passes i can live with something like this. But I did want to see if there was anything out there before I went with it. Thanks for that ;) lisa -- Lisa Herrod Web Usability: User Experience Research, Consulting and Training Business: http://www.Scenarioseven.com.au Blog: http://www.Scenariogirl.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: Re: [WSG] Standards compliance and Autocomplete
I have had the same question fluttering around in my head. the thought process for me begins with Accessibility: "can other people still get to the search result that the auto complete is attempting to show if the are using a screen reader or have javascript turned off, or there are bugs (like viewing via a mobile device)". Then there is the standards way of marking up information and following all the other best practice ways of doing things. William > Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Lisa Herrod wrote: > > Just wondering if there is a standards compliant way of implementing > > 'autocomplete' on forms, which I believe is proprietry...? > > Not tested it, but...could you inject the autocomplete="off" via > javascript to the form element? > > > An example might be that there is a login and password field on a > > banking site and you don't want the browser to remember the data. I > > realise there are ways around this and that smart people can still > work > > it out :) > > Again, not tested, but unless I'm mistaken: when using https, the > browser doesn't cache/autocomplete (I may be talking out of my rear > here, but it does ring a vague bell). > > If all else fails, I'd rather have an invalid attribute (with a good > rationale why it was used) that doesn't have adverse effects (as opposed > > to invalid elements, which have the potential of messing up the DOM more > > dramatically) any day if it actually provides an improvement to > usability. > > P > -- > Patrick H. Lauke > __ > re÷dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively > [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] > www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk > http://redux.deviantart.com > __ > Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force > http://webstandards.org/ > __ > > > *** > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Standards compliance and Autocomplete
Lisa Herrod wrote: Just wondering if there is a standards compliant way of implementing 'autocomplete' on forms, which I believe is proprietry...? Not tested it, but...could you inject the autocomplete="off" via javascript to the form element? An example might be that there is a login and password field on a banking site and you don't want the browser to remember the data. I realise there are ways around this and that smart people can still work it out :) Again, not tested, but unless I'm mistaken: when using https, the browser doesn't cache/autocomplete (I may be talking out of my rear here, but it does ring a vague bell). If all else fails, I'd rather have an invalid attribute (with a good rationale why it was used) that doesn't have adverse effects (as opposed to invalid elements, which have the potential of messing up the DOM more dramatically) any day if it actually provides an improvement to usability. P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
