W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2007

Re: HEADERS, FOR whom - any ID?

From: Sander Tekelenburg <st@isoc.nl>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 00:59:48 +0200
Message-Id: <p0624062bc2dff4cc8c73@[]>
To: <public-html@w3.org>

At 21:21 -0500 UTC, on 2007-08-07, Robert Burns wrote:

> On Aug 7, 2007, at 8:32 PM, Sander Tekelenburg wrote:


>> We're talking about author CSS in this case (because only the
>> author can know
>> whether the text of the label makes sense at one or the other side
>> of a control).
> In this example, yes. However, that's an indication that there are
> semantics missing from the markup. For example, an enumerated
> attribute  on a label could indicate whether the label default
> position was meaningful or not.

Ah, now I see where you're heading :) Yes, such an attribute could safeguard
from inappropriate CSS rules. Agreed.

However, I don't think it would be wise to rely on authors to set this. The
other way around seems safer: allow authors to define that the order of the
label and its control is irrelevant, and only allow CSS to switch label and
control around when this attribute is set. Authors might still set such an
attribute when it is inapproriate, but at least they'll need to make the
mistake on purpose then.


> having such an attribute would allow
> users to arrange controls and labels in the way they preferred
> (without messing up the cases where label order mattered).


[... <label>blah<control1><control2></label>]

>> I wonder what such markup would imply. How should a UA treat that
>> in a manner that is useful for the user?
> To me this implies that two controls are related to the extent that
> they act together and share the same label.

Agreed. I'm just wondering how the UA might convey that. Which of the two
controls should be activated when the label is 'clicked'? Or should it not
activate but do something else?

Sander Tekelenburg
The Web Repair Initiative: <http://webrepair.org/>
Received on Wednesday, 8 August 2007 23:00:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:25 UTC