[Bug 10559] blur() is handy, and should not be ignored

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10559

--- Comment #11 from anatoly techtonik <techtonik@gmail.com> 2010-10-12 08:04:30 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> > Specification doesn't mention if hidden elements are focusable or not.
> 
> Yes it does. It says "An element is focusable if the user agent's default
> behavior allows it to be focusable or if the element is specially focusable,
> *but only if the element is either being rendered*".
> 
> 
> > Right, but seems like Chrome doesn't support this HTML5 feature.
> 
> File a bug on Chrome. :-)

I've made a workaround for all browsers by reimplementing "unfocus steps" logic
in JS. 

> > BTW, why the language is so complex?
> > "When an element that is focused stops being a focusable element, or stops
> > being focused without another element being explicitly focused in its
> > stead...". Why not to just say "When focused element becomes non focusable, or
> > focus is removed from it without selecting another element..."?
> 
> Because it has to be precise. Consider the text you wrote: what does it mean
> for another element to be selected? Is that to do with text selection? Also,
> your grammar is not correct English... many of the words you omit are actually
> needed to be correct English. :-)

I'd really like to fill the gaps in my education, as I can't see the missing
parts. =) On the other side the spec will be useless if there won't be a person
who can read correct English. I know that it is better is spec is concise, but
you may be compressing the text of spec too much, throwing out user stories on
the way. But user stories help to decompress the sense much faster. Maybe they
still can be attached externally.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Tuesday, 12 October 2010 08:04:31 UTC