[Bug 13283] Current definition for [hidden] is not very useful for Web application developers. Every style rules in the author style sheet have to contain :not([hidden]) in their selectors to not override 'display' property for [hidden] elements.

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13283

Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
                 CC|                            |ian@hixie.ch
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX

--- Comment #5 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2011-08-10 23:06:51 UTC ---
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are
satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If
you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please
reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML
Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest
title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue
yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
   http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html

Status: Rejected
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: 

We definitely don't want to prevent authors from changing how hidden="" is
implemented at the CSS level. For example, I have in the past changed it to
opacity:0 so that I can do animations on opacity using transitions. One could
do similar things with other properties, e.g. height:0 to do a roll-up.

I do agree that it is rather annoying that every rule with 'display' in it ends
up wacking the default [hidden] rule. Not sure what we can do about it though.
It's not really any different than the way you have to be careful about not
blowing away the 'display' property of <table> or the 'font' property of <h1>
or whatnot. I'm skeptical about adding a new layer to the cascade; first the
cascade is pretty complex already, and second it would be confusing to suddenly
have this one feature that has to be overridden by !important.

If anyone has any other ideas, though, we should definitely consider them.

-- 
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 Wednesday, 10 August 2011 23:06:52 UTC