Native or Not? -- A Form Widgets Compromise Proposal

[mpmchugh]

Which IE? IE Mac uses Mac OS Platinum style elements which are hardly 'OS-agnostic'. IE for Win uses standard Windows elements which are not 'OS-agnostic' either. IE is not in the least an OS-agnostic product on that front.

Actually, you're not quite right here, and precisely miss the point of my argument, which is that when using CSS, form elements on IE DO change. Chimera's do not.

I would also point out that Gecko form elements are no longer as Windows esque considering that Windows XP has all new out of place form widgets!

Again, we may not agree that the nature of form elements are part of the Web vs. being part of the OS, but I maintain that this should first be the Web authors choice, override-able by the User. This should not be unilaterally decided by the Browser.

My original proposal of using a checkbox to "Always use Aqua Buttons and form elements" set to OFF by default was in the spirit of aligning the way form elements are treated with the way other CSS items are.

-------

Since there is some dissent around the issue, I would amend my proposal to incorporate <b>googolplex</b>'s suggestion, that the default be Aqua elements unless there are any form related CSS attributes applied, in which case the Gecko elements would be used.

In this case, I would also then suggest (perhaps to the chagrin of the developers), that there be two checkboxes in the Appearance pane, both off by default:

"Always use Aqua Buttons and form elements"
"Always use Gecko Buttons and form elements"

Again, this would give the User the ultimate choice in the matter one way or the other.

With the default behavior being...

"Aqua elements unless there are CSS attributes specified,
in which case use Gecko elements"

...Web authors could be confident that the default behavior will allow their CSS styling to be displayed.

...Aqua adherents would get Aqua by default, and an option to force every site to use them.

...Web standards / Gecko adherents would also have an option to force the Gecko widgets.

(This plan would negate the need for some sort of use Aqua wdgets META tag -- which would have been very non-standards anyway... )

Is everyone taken care of in this scenario?

I hope so. My main goal here is to make sure evryone is as happy as possible so Chimera can be as popular as possible amongst Mac Users.

-Michael

[neilio]

Which IE? IE Mac uses Mac OS Platinum style elements which are hardly 'OS-agnostic'. IE for Win uses standard Windows elements which are not 'OS-agnostic' either. IE is not in the least an OS-agnostic product on that front.

Actually, you're not quite right here, and precisely miss the point of my argument, which is that when using CSS, form elements on IE DO change. Chimera's do not.

This is what I meant, too. Brain is on fumes today; I should have explained it better.

[stewey]

I'm not trying to incite any sort of derogatory reply here, but this whole discussion of Mozilla form elements is nutty.

I have to agree with fishhead, sparkleytone, wesayso, and others. The sole reason I switched to Chimera is because it conformed to aqua. If I'm not mistaken the sole reason Chimera was developed is to put an Apple (aqua) face on Mozilla.

If numpties have their way and re-introduce Mozilla form elements, I (and many others I'd bet) would drop it in a heartbeat.

Stop the madness

Stew.

[neilio]

I'm not trying to incite any sort of derogatory reply here, but this whole discussion of Mozilla form elements is nutty.

If numpties have their way...

Oh, so you're not trying to incite a derogatory reply, are you? Nice work.

[MXN]

(This plan would negate the need for some sort of use Aqua wdgets META tag -- which would have been very non-standards anyway... )

I just want to point out that M$IE has a <code>MSThemeCompatible</code> meta tag. It can take the values <code>yes</code> and <code>no</code>, and it was intended for solving the same problem, except with Windows XP. I'm not saying that Chimera should have this too, but Chimera's not the only browser to have this problem.

[mpmchugh]

If I'm not mistaken the sole reason Chimera was developed is to put an Apple (aqua) face on Mozilla.

Your derogatory inciting aside, the reason for developing Chimera was to put a Cocoa/Aqua interface on the Gecko rendering engine at the heart of Mozilla.

The debate (which has been rather civil if you ask me) was regarding disagreement over weather or not form elements on Web pages should be treated as part of the Aqua interface of the application or as part of the Gecko rendering engine, and more importantly who should have control over the issue -- The page author, The User or the Browser.

My goal is to stop the madness and arrive at a proposal to the Chimera developers that satisfies everyone and puts the ultimate control over the issue in the hands of the user.

If numpties have their way and re-introduce Mozilla form elements, I (and many others I'd bet) would drop it in a heartbeat.

Granted you could say that anyone who wants Gecko form elements should just go use Mozilla, but the other part of te argument is that we Gecko adherents would also like an Aqua interface on our browser -- just not applied to our Web pages. An Aqua interface on a true Gecko browser -- Is that too much to ask?

If you read the original proposal, and the revised one which incorporate googolplex's suggestion, you'd see a solution that gives you what you want, as well as those of us who politely disagree.

I would argue that the true "numpties" in this debate are those not willing to adopt a compromise -- especially when it would give each user exactly what they want out of Chimera!.

After all, the more happy users there are, the more successful Chimera will be.

-Michael

[mpmchugh]

(This plan would negate the need for some sort of use Aqua wdgets META tag -- which would have been very non-standards anyway... )

I just want to point out that M$IE has a <code>MSThemeCompatible</code> meta tag. It can take the values <code>yes</code> and <code>no</code>, and it was intended for solving the same problem, except with Windows XP. I'm not saying that Chimera should have this too, but Chimera's not the only browser to have this problem.

This was were I was going in the original proposal, which was to allow the Author to override the browser default. However, in light of googleplex's suggestion, I think it would be better to use the automatic behavior if possible, Aqua by default and switch to Gecko in the presence of CSS altered form elements -- though a META tag would not be entirely useless either.

It could be, in order of priority/override:

1. Use Aqua widgets by default.

2. Use Gecko widgets if CSS is applied to form elements.

3. Use Gecko widgets if page sets "AquaThemeCompatible" to false

4. Use Aqua widgets if page sets "AquaThemeCompatible" to true
(kind of useless due to #1)

5. Use Gecko widgets if "Always use Gecko widgets" user preference is set.

6. Use Aqua widgets if "Always use Aqua widgets" user preference is set.

Obviously only either 5 or 6 could be checked and either would override all previous cases.

-mpm

[fishhead]

When using CSS, form elements do not change when they should, but rather the Aqua elements always appear. That sort of sounds like a bug. Have you searched in bugzilla? You probably should, and if you find nothing file an Enhancement Request/Bug in bugzilla. Personally I am as happy to only ever see Aqua form elements (most CSS form elements I have seen only lended to confused design, and I actually like that I never seen them in Chimera), so I think a preference would be a nice addition. I would like to see in Preferences->Appearance a checkbox for 'Always use Aqua widgets' or somesuch. If you file or find a bug please post it so that people who care can vote for it.

[stewey]

Oh, so you're not trying to incite a derogatory reply, are you? Nice work.

I thought that was particularly nice myself, thanks

[stewey]

The debate (which has been rather civil if you ask me) was regarding disagreement over weather or not form elements on Web pages should be treated as part of the Aqua interface of the application or as part of the Gecko rendering engine, and more importantly who should have control over the issue -- The page author, The User or the Browser.
...
If you read the original proposal, and the revised one which incorporate googolplex's suggestion, you'd see a solution that gives you what you want, as well as those of us who politely disagree.

You say that like I don't understand the topic. I've read the majority of it, and I understand the debate. I must confess, I'm not opposed to a tiny little option burried somewhere in a preference pane that allows the Gecko stalwarts to enable their choice of form elements. However, I can't help but feel that this is a serious digression, and would ultimately take time away from other more pressing feature additons.

After all, the more happy users there are, the more successful Chimera will be.

Agreed, so lets make me happy ...ah, just playing.

[phredx]

is there actually a form element widget standard that is not proprietary? i.e., does the W3C actually have a graphical description of how default (i.e., those unmodified by CSS) form elements are supposed to look? if not, then Mozilla's own defaults are no less proprietary than Apple's. i'm just wondering what "standard" the folks arguing against the "proprietary" Aqua widgets are favoring.

i'd be curious to know how the W3C expects widget sets to behave according to the terms of CSS, anyway, especially if they have no standard description of how unaltered widgets ought to look.

[neilio]

i'd be curious to know how the W3C expects widget sets to behave according to the terms of CSS, anyway, especially if they have no standard description of how unaltered widgets ought to look.

It's not the "look" that is being debated; it's the fact that by using built-in Aqua elements for form widgets, any page-specified CSS styling (i.e. background-color, font, etc.) is not visible. The widgets could look like anything as long as they supported CSS styles.

[mpmchugh]

is there actually a form element widget standard that is not proprietary? i.e., does the W3C actually have a graphical description of how default (i.e., those unmodified by CSS) form elements are supposed to look? if not, then Mozilla's own defaults are no less proprietary than Apple's. I'm just wondering what "standard" the folks arguing against the "proprietary" Aqua widgets are favoring.

i'd be curious to know how the W3C expects widget sets to behave according to the terms of CSS, anyway, especially if they have no standard description of how unaltered widgets ought to look.

As I mentioned in the first post, there is currently no official W3C standard for widgets, though there is an entire proposal for dealing with FORMS in general called XForms, which as of Nov. 12 is an official W3C Candidate Recommendation.

As with any standard, it grows out of the needs of content providers and users alike, as such it will take time to be propagated throughout the Web and the various browsers.

In the meantime, there is some alignment between the way IE and Mozilla allow for CSS manipulation of form elements, and since Mozilla's is part of Gecko, I'm suggesting that Chimera not entirely dismiss the work the Gecko team did towards standardization, cross-platform interoperability and the usefulness of CSS in manipulating forms display.

Again, the focus of my proposal is to keep the choice in the hands of the content providers and the end user, while we await a standard which could take years to implement.

-mpm

[mpmchugh]

However, I can't help but feel that this is a serious digression, and would ultimately take time away from other more pressing feature additons.

Here's to the Crazy ones...

This shouldn't be a big deal to implement, depending on how it's done, but frankly, effort had to be put into Chimera to override the Gecko widgets to begin with. Think how much time would have been saved if they just used Gecko as it was intended!

I'd argue that the way content is displayed is as important as any browser feature, but that's my opinion as a content provider.

And remember, I'm not arguing to take away your options, but to increase them!

-mpm

[phredx]

As I mentioned in the first post, there is currently no official W3C standard for widgets, though there is an entire proposal for dealing with FORMS in general called XForms, which as of Nov. 12 is an official W3C Candidate Recommendation.

ah, yes. i seem to have read around your parentheses in that first post.

just to add my voice to the mix, i'd be satisfied if Chimera supported a pref with the following options:

1) always use Aqua widgets
2) use Aqua widgets when not targeted by CSS, Gecko widgets otherwise
3) never use Aqua widgets