[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: web subscription pages problem

On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 04:29:08PM +0100, Wookey wrote:
> This seems to be because the form:
> <button type="submit" name="action" value="subscribe">Subscribe</button>
> <button type="submit" name="action" value="unsubscribe">Unsubscribe</button>
>  is used for these buttonsm rather than 
> <input type="submit" name="action" value="subscribe">
> <input type="submit" name="action" value="unsubscribe">
> Both of these parse as valid HTML 4.0, but the latter form is also valid
> HTML 3.2 (I think) and hence works on my browsers. Unless there is a
> _really_ good reason I think we should keep the more-compatible form, as
> not being able to subscribe or unsubscribe with these pages is a serious
> fault.

What exactly is the advantage of supporting HTML _3.2_ over 4.0, i.e. why
not roll back to 2.0 or even 1.0? I'm sure someone will be able to find a
live specimen of a browser that doesn't support 3.2 in the wild. :)

Interesting gopher-related slurs come to my mind right now, but I'll spare
you :)

I used <button> because the HTML 4 specification said it was not allowed to
have two <input type=submit>s in one form. I may have misread it, though, I
didn't read it too carefully, I just went with the other version.

I'll test it and see if it works.

> Whilst validating I did notice one other tiny complaint:
> > Line 128, column 25:
> >  under the GPL.</small></p>
> >  Error:  end tag for element "P" which is not open; try removing the end
> > tag or check for improper nesting of elements 
> > 
> > Sorry, this document does not validate as HTML 4.0 Transitional.
> I think this means the <p> needs to be moved after the <hr> in the para
> above.

That's valid, yeah.

     2. That which causes joy or happiness.

Reply to: