- From: Michael[tm] Smith <mike@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 13:01:32 +0900
- To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, 2013-10-16 13:57 +1100: > On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: > > Meanwhile, I would suggest following the lead of aria, and writing specs, > > getting implementations, and fostering usage. > > > > Note the the existing validator checks for aria. Not indiscriminately, but > > very deliberately. If your spec gets anything resembling traction, I would > > expect that the validator will do the same for you. Of course, you could > > speed up the process by providing a patch... > > That makes sense for things that you'd want to get into the spec. But > what about yandex wanting to use attributes just for their own > applications only? Isn't that exactly what data-* is for? > yandex-* would come up as invalid. Having to do data-yandex-* seems > unwieldy. It doesn't seem very unwieldy to me. But regardless, they wouldn't need to do it data-yandex-* anyway -- they could just do data-*. Because they'd not be using anybody else's data-* attributes, and so wouldn't have any risk of name collisions. And the attributes are just for their own applications, so they're not expecting anybody else to do anything with them. --Mike -- Michael[tm] Smith http://people.w3.org/mike
Received on Wednesday, 16 October 2013 04:01:44 UTC