I remember that as the first time when using default styling of basic elements produced unusable results. I have to ask, when did it become my job to solve things like this?? Hidden check boxes with a check box in a label is not a nice elegant way of styling something at all. It's closer to an ugly hack. I find it an upsetting development given how well everything else was designed.
It seems we are going to get more good ideas in unfinished form?
The definition of a range is: "the area of variation between upper and lower limits on a particular scale." Why would the user only get to configure 1 of the 2?
The definition of a slider is: a knob or lever that is moved horizontally or vertically to control a variable, such as the volume of a radio.
enterkeyhint="next" conceptually a great idea. Sadly it doesn't do anything? I wanted an attribute that makes the button go to the "next field".
Easily fixed by every developer individually a million+ times deep into the future.
The up and down navigation controls provided by the browser work exactly the way we expect them to.
We had a good thing going there. It does what it says on the tin. Its how I (and everyone else) like things. A stop button makes it stop. Scissors are to cut. The little floppy disk is to save. A play button makes it play. etc
It seems so fundamental? How could anyone get this wrong? The user wants working buttons on their interface. Buttons that behave the way they expect.
I think no one wants an enter key that looks like a "next" button. In case I'm mistaken about that they could simply add a different value domstring.
>'enter' typically indicating inserting a new line.
I have to inserts a new line at the cursor?
>'done' typically meaning there is nothing more to input and the input method editor (IME) will be closed.
I have to close it?
>'go' typically meaning to take the user to the target of the text they typed.
I have to submit the form?
>'next' typically taking the user to the next field that will accept text.
I have to move the cursor to the next field?
>'previous' typically taking the user to the previous field that will accept text.
I have to move the cursor to the previous field?
>'search' typically taking the user to the results of searching for the text they have typed.
I have to submit the form?
>'send' typically delivering the text to its target.
They had to come up with a name for a slider and called it range. This is the wrong name for it. A range slider should have 2 dots: One for the minimum and one for the maximum value. (Most common is searching by price in a web shop)
It means that if they ever want to introduce a real range selector it will have to get a different name.
It also means that if you search google for a range selector you are no longer able to find any of them. If a native one is ever introduced you wont be able to find it searching for range selector.
Also quite silly is that if you need both in your form you cant use this build in one as it will look different from your custom creation.
And it makes it harder to reason about forms. In the previous sentence I wanted to write "...need both a slider and a range selector" but that seems inaccurate/confusing.
It seems we are going to get more good ideas in unfinished form?
The definition of a range is: "the area of variation between upper and lower limits on a particular scale." Why would the user only get to configure 1 of the 2? The definition of a slider is: a knob or lever that is moved horizontally or vertically to control a variable, such as the volume of a radio.
enterkeyhint="next" conceptually a great idea. Sadly it doesn't do anything? I wanted an attribute that makes the button go to the "next field".
Easily fixed by every developer individually a million+ times deep into the future.