23173 2013-09-06 12:54:24 +0000 Scope <label> association to the home subtree rather than to the document, to find controls in e.g. a template (document fragment) 2013-11-12 00:08:58 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WHATWG HTML unspecified Other other RESOLVED WORKSFORME http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#attr-label-for P3 normal Unsorted 1 contributor ian ian mike zcorpan contributor oldest_to_newest 93092 0 contributor 2013-09-06 12:54:24 +0000 Specification: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/forms.html Multipage: http://www.whatwg.org/C#attr-label-for Complete: http://www.whatwg.org/c#attr-label-for Referrer: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/ Comment: Allow association within home subtree rather than only in document, to find the control in e.g. a template (document fragment) Posted from: 90.230.218.37 User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_8_3) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/29.0.1547.57 Safari/537.36 OPR/16.0.1196.55 (Edition Next) 93168 1 ian 2013-09-09 21:43:10 +0000 Hmm, interesting idea. What do browsers do? 93172 2 zcorpan 2013-09-09 22:27:43 +0000 http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/2514 Looks like Presto/Blink/Gecko already do what this bug suggests. (Haven't checked IE.) 93373 3 ian 2013-09-13 22:40:34 +0000 This seems to only work for containership, not ID assignment: http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/2523 Interestingly, the for="" thing seems to work even when the control is in the document but the label isn't: http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/2522 What do we want to spec? 93390 4 zcorpan 2013-09-14 20:33:47 +0000 Ah. 2522 doesn't work in Gecko though. I don't know if it's annoying to implement the id lookup outside the document. So I think we should either do what I suggested in comment 0 or keep the spec as is. What browsers do now is inconsistent. 93439 5 ian 2013-09-16 17:54:34 +0000 I agree that those are reasonable alternatives. I don't know which one to go with. In the interests of minimising churn, I'm biased towards the current text. We should probably file bugs on the browsers to see if they'll change... 96150 6 ian 2013-11-12 00:08:58 +0000 I'm going with leaving the spec as-is. It matches some browsers, and minimises churn. It's not obvious that any other text is significantly better enough to justify changing the spec.