W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2011

Re: Bug 11239

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 21:07:11 +0000 (UTC)
To: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1104282103240.25791@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 8:55 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> > On Thu, 28 Apr 2011, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
> >>
> >> One example would be that the system has no caret. For example, a 
> >> system with no visual output presumably does not have a caret blink 
> >> rate.
> > [...]
> > Or to put it another way: what problem does this solve?
> 
> The problem is if the author wants to use a default blink rate
> in the absence of better information.

When would such information be absent yet still relevant?

In the only concrete example that you have given, there is no visual 
output, so there's no caret, so the blink rate is irrelevant.


> Consider two scenarios:
> 
>    1. The user has set his caret to not blink. When drawing a custom
>       canvas caret, the author wants to draw a caret that does not blink.

Sure, this exists (e.g. the caret in RISCOS does not blink) and is 
supported (the period returned is 0).


>    2. The UA cannot provide a blink rate (for whatever reason). When
>       drawing a canvas caret, the author wants to draw a caret with a
>       default blink rate (apparently this is usually 500ms).

What scenario could there be? If there is no concrete scenario where this 
happens, then there's no point discussing it.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 28 April 2011 21:07:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:28 GMT