I think on top is better. Usually these are things you dont want the user to type in because you want clean data (without the prefix). If you put it in a span with a class, then the user could change the color through CSS. One interesting case is the user has an option of http or https. But in this case, I wouldn't use the watermark. I would have a selectbox before the input box and let the user select that way, rather than trust them to get it right in the one field.
Does that make sense? Glen On 6/1/07, Josh Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That's a cool idea. Would you want the watermark in this instance to be on top of the input as you described (and possibly a different color), or actually inside of the input box and included in the text when you get the value? Josh On 6/1/07, Glen Lipka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I love it. I think I will switch to this one rather than the one I was > using. > Previously, I had heard this technique being called "OverLabel". > However, I think Watermark is a much better name. > > One feature request: > Often I have an input that the user should type in their URL or > sometimes its a dollar figure or percentage. > The way I currently do this is I make a span with the words "http://"; or > "$" or "%" in it, then I position it absolutely over the input and increase > the left or right padding of the input so you don't write over it. > Basically, I am creating a persistent "Watermark" to help the user know NOT > to put in that part. So they enter 4.05 instead of $4.05. > > It seems like this is a natural fit with the watermark plugin, even > though it does something a little differently under the covers. > $( "#first").Watermark("http://";, "fixed" ); //or something > What do you think? > > Glen > > On 6/1/07, Josh Bush < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I haven't had a chance to test any of my plugins with v1.1.3. I'll be > > looking into it soon. Thanks for the response! > > > > On Jun 1, 9:28 am, Rey Bango <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > Looks great in IE7 and FF 2.0.0.4 Josh. Great work. This is a very > > > useful plugin. > > > > > > Have you tested it with jQuery v1.1.3 as well? > > > > > > Rey... > > > > > > > > > > > > Josh Bush wrote: > > > > Stupid last minute changes. I fixed my goof. Please see if that > > > > corrects the problem. > > > > > > > On Jun 1, 8:45 am, "Dan G. Switzer, II" < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > >> Josh, > > > > > > >>> It's been a long time since I've posted anything. I've been > > busy, but > > > >>> I did manage to squeeze out another plugin before my vacation. > > > >>> I'm proud to announce the first Beta of my <a href="http:// > > > >>> digitalbush.com/projects/watermark-input-plugin">Watermark Input > > > > > >>> Plugin for jQuery</a>. This is the first public release for this > > > > > >>> plugin which has been used in a few of my other projects. > > > >>> Please let me know if you have any troubles. I welcome your > > feedback. > > > >> I'm getting errors in both IE6 and FF2: > > > > > > >> settings is not > > definedhttp://www.digitalbush.com/files/jquery/watermarkinput/beta1/jquery.w... > > > >> kinput.js > > > >> Line 60 > > > >> if(input.val()==settings.text ) > > > > > > >> -Dan > > > > > > -- > > > BrightLight Development, LLC. > > > 954-775-1111 (o) > > > 954-600-2726 (c) > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]://www.iambright.com > > > > > > > >
