W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-forms@w3.org > May 2008

value-empty is not enough

From: Leigh L. Klotz, Jr. <Leigh.Klotz@Xerox.com>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 11:36:57 -0700
Message-ID: <483DA649.8080300@Xerox.com>
To: public-forms@w3.org

In [1] John and I took on the action to propose a :value-empty CSS 

In reviewing the editor's draft, section G.1 "Pseudo Classes" [2], I've 
been reminded that CSS pseudo-classes are by convention tri-state, so 
for each pseudo-class there should its negation defined as well.   All 
existing Pseudo-classes in G.1 are defined in pairs.  The reason for the 
tri-state is that the middle is not excluded; for example, host language 
elements not bound to instance nodes would be neither empty nor non-empty.

Therefore, I propose that we define :value-empty as a pair, and 
tentatively that we use :value-empty and :value-non-empty.
(There is precedent for the use of hyphenated words; for example, 
:out-of-range and :read-write.)

[2] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/specs/XForms1.1/index-all.html#N89852

Received on Wednesday, 28 May 2008 18:37:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:13:57 UTC