Re: lynx-dev Re: [dev.15] fixup patch: edit TEXTAREA

[Leonid Pauzner]

2-Feb-99 10:01 Kim DeVaughn wrote:

> It would really help if I knew of a page that delivered a TEXTAREA that
> was preloaded with some actual data (instead of being blank), *and* that
> had a reset button (all the preloaded pages that I've seen, DO NOT have
> a reset).  Know any url's that do that ...?

I have not seen such pages but any page may be reloaded by CTRL-R
or you may add a reset button yourself to your example,
quoted from HTML4.0, file forms.html (see also "readonly" attribute BTW):


   The TEXTAREA element creates a multi-line text input control (as
   opposed to a single-line INPUT control). The content of this element
   provides the initial text presented by the control.

   This example creates a TEXTAREA control that is 20 rows by 80 columns
   and contains two lines of text initially. The TEXTAREA is followed by
   submit and reset buttons.

<FORM action="http://somesite.com/prog/text-read"; method="post">
   <P>
   <TEXTAREA name="thetext" rows="20" cols="80">
   First line of initial text.
   Second line of initial text.
   </TEXTAREA>
   <INPUT type="submit" value="Send"><INPUT type="reset">
   </P>
</FORM>

   Setting the readonly attribute allows authors to display unmodifiable
   text in a TEXTAREA. This differs from using standard marked-up text in
   a document because the value of TEXTAREA is submitted with the form.


> | (2) ignore ^Ve if beeng invoked at forms input (not textarea)

> Hmmm.  Is not invoking the editor what's desired?  I think it will only
> work on local/temp files, such as are created by the o(ptions) form.  In
> any case, ^Ve when in such a field was working that way prior to my work

Yes, that was an old behaviour, and was not a problem before
since nobody got an idea to press "Ctrl-V e" unless he had
a strong understanding what he want. Now, with textarea patch,
many users may wrongly press "Ctrl-V e" on a single line input field,
it became much more frequent error now.

> on the TEXTAREA edit stuff ... it's not a feature that I've added, but
> it'd certainly be easy enough to prohibit it, if that's waht people want.

> /kim