W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2012

Re: Split Issue 30?

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 18:19:58 -0800
Message-Id: <FBDD09F8-AC90-4946-9902-4281F55F31BB@jumis.com>
Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
The issue is very much about whether hidden should mean irrelevant.

You couldn't have used a better word.

Shadow dom semantics are starting to creep up. @shadow is something to consider.

I'm feeling a vibe.

-Charles



On Feb 14, 2012, at 6:13 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Mon, 13 Feb 2012, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> 
>> I think this is what Jonas is proposing - behavior for @hidden elements 
>> that would not apply to content which is set to display: none in other 
>> ways. I don't think be advocates changing behavior for display: none 
>> content in any way.
> 
> I don't think it would make sense for content that is marked up as 
> relevant (not hidden="") but happens to be display:none to be less 
> accessible than content that is marked as irrelevant (hidden="") and thus 
> display:none, FWIW.
> 
> -- 
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
> 
Received on Wednesday, 15 February 2012 02:20:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:30 UTC