55
edits
The autocomplete attribute and web documents using XHTML: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The autocomplete attribute and web documents using XHTML (view source)
Revision as of 14:32, 10 August 2006
, 10 August 2006→The options
| Line 85: | Line 85: | ||
2. ''If'' we agree that <code>autocomplete</code> is ultimately detrimental to security, the next-best solution would be to persuade the web and financial communities to employ other techniques. Good luck with that. | 2. ''If'' we agree that <code>autocomplete</code> is ultimately detrimental to security, the next-best solution would be to persuade the web and financial communities to employ other techniques. Good luck with that. | ||
3. Failing that, a good solution would be to persuade the W3C to include the autocomplete attribute in an XHTML module similar to the [http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/dtd_module_defs.html#a_module_Legacy Legacy module]. When I originally drafted this proposal, I thought that would never happen, but it looks like there's a fighting chance Web Forms 2.0 (which comes in HTML and XML flavours) will be adopted by the W3C - and Web Forms 2.0 includes the "autocomplete" attribute. :) See [http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=153013&t=1155219050 my discussion with Opera's Anne van Kesteren] and keep an eye out for | 3. Failing that, a good solution would be to persuade the W3C to include the autocomplete attribute in an XHTML module similar to the [http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/dtd_module_defs.html#a_module_Legacy Legacy module]. When I originally drafted this proposal, I thought that would never happen, but it looks like there's a fighting chance Web Forms 2.0 (which comes in HTML and XML flavours) will be adopted by the W3C - and Web Forms 2.0 includes the "autocomplete" attribute. :) See [http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=153013&t=1155219050 my discussion with Opera's Anne van Kesteren] and keep an eye out for Web Forms 2.0 news in September! | ||
4. Still let's not count our chickens until they've hatched. Failing that, we could add browser support for a <code>formhistory</code> attribute in a vendor neutral URI such as <nowiki>http://www.legacymarkup.org/xmlns/formhistory</nowiki>, and implement it in a simple XHTML module. When serving the same resource as HTML following content negotiation, the XSL transformation to HTML would be trivial: | 4. Still let's not count our chickens until they've hatched. Failing that, we could add browser support for a <code>formhistory</code> attribute in a vendor neutral URI such as <nowiki>http://www.legacymarkup.org/xmlns/formhistory</nowiki>, and implement it in a simple XHTML module. When serving the same resource as HTML following content negotiation, the XSL transformation to HTML would be trivial: | ||