3 ms·

This library represents HTML in types. The tag turns into a typed_html::elements::p [1], inside of which the attributes are held by a typed_html::elements::

This library represents HTML in types. The tag turns into a typed_html::elements::p [1], inside of which the attributes are held by a typed_html::elements::Attrs_p [2]. [1] https://docs.rs/typed-html/0.1.0/typed_html/elements/struct.p.html https://docs.rs/typed-html/0.1.0/typed_html/elements/struct.... [2] https://docs.rs/typed-html/0.1.0/typed_html/elements/struct.Attrs_p.html https://docs.rs/typed-html/0.1.0/typed_html/elements/struct.... let doc: DOMTree<String> = html!{ <body> <img alt="xxx" /> </body> }; If you try to give an alt attribute, the program fails to compile. error[E0609]: no field `alt` on type `typed_html::elements::Attrs_p` --> src/main.rs:12:16 | 12 | | ^^^ unknown field | = note: available fields are: `accesskey`, `autocapitalize`, `class`, `contenteditable`, `contextmenu` ... and 9 others

calebh 8y ago
This solution bundles all of the attributes into the same type, which comes with the downside that it's impossible to represent a single attribute without also receiving all the other attributes. I think that the best solution in Haskell would be to group the types in a typeclass. However then the typeclass is not directly associated with the p or img value constructors. I wonder if there is some way to use dependent types to improve this situation.
err4nt 8y ago
This is something that's very easy to check in a web browser with DOM - Suppose you have this HTML: hello<img src=#> If you try to access the `.alt` property of the tag you get `undefined`, and if you try to access the `.alt` property of the <img> tag it returns the empty string in this case because the property exists on that tag, but hasn't been set to anything.

calebh 8y ago

This solution bundles all of the attributes into the same type, which comes with the downside that it's impossible to represent a single attribute without also receiving all the other attributes. I think that the best solution in Haskell would be to group the types in a typeclass. However then the typeclass is not directly associated with the p or img value constructors. I wonder if there is some way to use dependent types to improve this situation.

err4nt 8y ago

This is something that's very easy to check in a web browser with DOM - Suppose you have this HTML: hello<img src=#> If you try to access the `.alt` property of the tag you get `undefined`, and if you try to access the `.alt` property of the <img> tag it returns the empty string in this case because the property exists on that tag, but hasn't been set to anything.

This library represents HTML in types. The <p> tag turns into a typed_html::elements::p [1], inside of which the attributes are held by a typed_html::elements::

This library represents HTML in types. The <p> tag turns into a typed_html::elements::p [1], inside of which the attributes are held by a typed_html::elements::