Aryeh, ok, thanks for clarifying that. I also note now that http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#date-state
shows max and min can be written as date strings. Phew about that.
But I'm glad you agree with the UI. I also don't think that the 'blank
text box with a calendar icon to the right' is the most optimal way of
asking the normal human being to choose a date -- except where this
question is on a compact form, or where the question is optional or
unimportant and so shouldn't dominate the web page.
I feel this textbox with icon UI has arisen based on the limited time
available to most website developers and the fact that developers
wished to use a text input to ensure the data is part of a standard
GET/POST submission.
Sig
On 8/09/2009, at 11:44 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Anne van Kesteren <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 00:40:02 +0200, Sigurd Magnusson
<[email protected]> wrote:
In looking at the HTML 5, I have noticed an opportunity to provide
additional elements to support date and time field types. (Or, if
I am
mistaken, it may simply be an opportunity to improve documentation
of an
existing feature).
Whereas most field types have a Min and Max attribute, this does not
appear to be true of date/time fields.
What makes you think they do not apply there?
They do, according to this handy-dandy chart:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/forms.html#input-type-attr-summary
The UI question is more vexing. Like a lot of features in HTML 5, how
useful these features will be to authors looks like it will depend a
lot on how consistently good the UI is that browsers implement. If
even one major browser has bad UI, or if the UIs prove to be
inflexible, that might kill a lot of the interest that many authors
have in using the new input types.
