From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Davis Subject: Re: Getting checkboxes in HTML output? Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 13:59:30 -0500 Message-ID: <5298E412.1040009@pfdstudio.com> References: <20131127154534.GA12765@pdavismbp15.iscinternal.com> <8738mhal2d.fsf@alphaville.bos.redhat.com> <20131127182059.GB12765@pdavismbp15.iscinternal.com> <20131128133329.GA28945@eyeBook> <87vbzc9rmj.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <86haawtdya.fsf@somewhere.org> <16f7d77c0769177de44354bcf25abb37@mail.rickster.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53619) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VmTHt-0000ra-LX for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 13:59:42 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VmTHo-0005bB-H0 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 13:59:37 -0500 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:39234) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VmTHo-0005b7-CF for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 13:59:32 -0500 In-Reply-To: <16f7d77c0769177de44354bcf25abb37@mail.rickster.com> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On 11/29/13, 11:11 AM, Rick Frankel wrote: > On 2013-11-28 16:58, Matt Price wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Sebastien Vauban >> wrote: >> Achim Gratz wrote: >> Rick Frankel writes: >> For xhtml compatibility, it would need to be 'checked="checked"'. I've >> done a quick look at the html dtd, and i does look like input elements >> are allowed outside of forms, but i would need to double >> check... Also, the fallback to "[-]" for the partially checked state >> is a bit inconsistent, perhaps changing background color or other >> attributre of the checkbox would be better. >> >> I'd much prefer if you'd be using character entities for that since you >> can't do any input on the HTML anyway (WHITE MEDIUM SQUARE, SQUARE WITH >> LOWER RIGHT DIAGONAL BLACK and BLACK MEDIUM SQUARE look like good >> candidates). That probably makes it UTF-8 only since I don't think >> these symbols are defined for plain (X)HTML, so for other encodings >> things should probably stay as they are. >> >> FWIW, here's what I do for the HTML export: >> >> In JS: >> >> #+begin_src js >> $(function () { >> $('li > code:contains("[X]")') >> .parent() >> .addClass('checked') >> .end() >> .remove(); >> $('li > code:contains("[-]")') >> .parent() >> .addClass('halfchecked') >> .end() >> .remove(); >> $('li > code:contains("[ ]")') >> .parent() >> .addClass('unchecked') >> .end() >> .remove(); >> }); >> #+end_src >> >> In CSS: >> >> #+begin_src css >> li.checked { >> list-style-image: url('../images/checked.png'); >> } >> >> li.halfchecked { >> list-style-image: url('../images/halfchecked.png'); >> } >> >> li.unchecked { >> list-style-image: url('../images/unchecked.png'); >> } >> #+end_src >> >> with 3 nice pictures of green V, red X, and blue || (line "pause" on >> recorders). >> >> >> >> so, I don't know if I'm the only one here who feels this way, but I >> would like to be able to export to an HTML file with ACTUAL HECKBOXES >> that I cna check off, say on a phone, when I put the milk in the >> shopping art, or pack the swim goggles in the vacation bag, or >> whatever. Maybe though I should be thinking in terms of some other >> export application, remember the milk or something. Am I describing a >> different use case than other users here, perhaps? > > My 3 cents: > > I don't see that active checkboxes would help since i don't see a use > case where you can save the html back with the modified input. The > github usecase mentioned in anothre thread requires a bunch of > javascript to work (and write-out the modified file). > > While Sebastien's solution is visually appealing, i don't think > requiring image assets is viable for the core exporter (note that it > could be done w/o javascript, another dependency i would like to > avoid). > > I've attached an html file which shows the various possible options. My > comments: > > 1. As mentioned above, I don't see active checkboxes as useful > since the modified state is transient. > 2. I don't really like the disabled checkboxes visually. > 3. Either of the other two approaches (the list item style, which > parallels Sebastien's approach w/o using images) works for me. > Visually I like the list item style solution, but doesn't really > make the intent clear. > > So, my vote is to change the exporter to use the BALLOT BOX and BALLOT > BOX WITH CHECK instead of the ascii character currently used and > indicate partially checked boxes ([-]) with greyed text. > > Opinions? > > rick > Thanks for the handy comparison page, Rick. Visually, I'm happy with either actual HTML checkbox elements or the Unicode BALLOT BOX and BALLOT BOX WITH CHECK characters. Semantically, I suppose it's better to avoid having active input elements, since, as you point out, they're completely transient, and so potentially misleading. Unfortunately, I don't think any of the "partial" options is very clear. They graying out is not particularly clear. But I could live with it if no better alternatives are found. -pd -- ---- Peter Davis The Tech Curmudgeon www.techcurmudgeon.com