Re: request for new forms submission consensus (frans van hoesel)
X-Delivered: at request of secret on
From: (frans van hoesel)
Message-id: <9310121905.AA02599@Xtreme>
Subject: Re: request for new forms submission consensus
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1993 20:05:06 +0100 (MET)
In-reply-to: <> from "Marc Andreessen" at Oct 12, 93 01:32:43 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL5]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 2060      
Initially Dave_raggett didn't like type=submit at all! He suggested to have
only one submit button for each form.
I pointed out to him that it can be very useful to have more.
He came up with the suggestion not to add SUBMIT to type=, but put
in a separate item.

I too think that the browser should evolve slowly over time, 
but I don't see the point why we cannot use dave suggestion. It doesn't
imply that you must actually implement it in all cases. But you could
implement it for those cases that you use submit.

why not simply change from
type=button submit

and dave will be happy, you don't have to change a lot, and it would
allow future extensions like <.. type=text submit>
where the submit is done as soon as the user finished the text with a return,
or <.. type=radio submit> (the form is submitted as soon as the user
selects one of the radio buttons)

I don't expect you to implement all those possibilities, but at least it
opens the possibility to implement them, without loosing anything.
I just want to keep the way to the futur open.

- frans

> Too much (and, in any case, too soon).  I feel like reposting my
> "kitchen sink" speech -- we are not creating an actual full-featured
> user interface builder (or building environment) here.  We are getting
> close in *some* respects, but we aren't going to be able to offer the
> range of functionality needed to deliver true GUI-building
> capabilities, including flexibly and customizably reactive interfaces.
> Therefore, I'd like to veto both the idea of arbitrarily tying
> submission to any interface element (there are user interface problems
> there, also -- it's not going to be clear to a user what's going on
> and why) and the idea of forms behavior scripting.
> Anticipating objections to my objection: During WWWWW this summer, I
> was termed "closed minded" by at least one person for trying to draw
> the line as to what we're willing to implement and support.  It's not
> closed-mindedness, it's triage -- we just can't do everything.
> Cheers,
> Marc