W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-bidi@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: HTML attribute with no value

From: Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin <aharon@google.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 05:50:19 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTinwwhcZ5=zL8Kv-MOyrSXtkd-=wYZYWKniLAzw=@mail.gmail.com>
To: Najib Tounsi <ntounsi@emi.ac.ma>
Cc: Tab Atkins <tabatkins@google.com>, public-i18n-bidi@w3.org
> I would prefer ubi as boolean attribute. <span ubi>
> equivalent to <span ubi="ubi"> (or "on" (or "true")),
> otherwise, it is "off" (or "false").

ubi can not be a boolean attribute in the exact same sense that selected is,
since selected does not have an explicit false value. If it's omitted, its
false. For ubi, we want an explicit false value because there are cases when
it is true by default. Thus, the "off" value, which no real boolean
attribute has.

Nevertheless, it is certainly our intention that <span ubi> should
be equivalent to <span ubi="ubi"> (or whatever we want to call the true
value). The question is how exactly to formally define ubi in order to
achieve that, and whether the true value implied by giving the attribute
with no value has to be "ubi", or can be the more meaningful "on".

Aharon

On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Najib Tounsi <ntounsi@gmail.com> wrote:

> Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin wrote:
>
>>  In the f2f, we said:
>>
>>  ubi syntax is ubi=”ubi”|””|”off”. The “ubi” and empty string values
>>  are equivalent, and mean that bidi isolation is on for the element.
>>
>>
>>  I am confused about why we needed two values meaning "on", and if so,
>>  why neither one of them is named "on".
>>
>
> +1
>
>
>
>>  The crux of my question is what, exactly, does the HTML spec say
>>  about an attributes with no value, e.g. <span foo>? Is it always
>>  equivalent to <span foo=foo>, or to <span foo="">, or something else?
>>
>>
> I would prefer ubi as boolean attribute. <span ubi> equivalent to <span
> ubi="ubi"> (or "on" (or "true")), otherwise, it is "off" (or "false").
>
> It seems that HTML 4.0 permit this.
>
> Najib
>
>
>   If <span foo> is equivalent to <span foo=foo>, I do not see why we
>>  need an empty string value.
>>
>>  If, on the other hand, <span foo> is equivalent to <span foo="">, I
>>  understand why we need an empty value as well as an equivalent
>>  non-empty value, but I do not understand why the latter has to be the
>>  meaningless "ubi". I would prefer ubi=”on”|””|”off”.
>>
>>  Aharon
>>
>
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 20 September 2010 03:51:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 20 September 2010 03:51:12 GMT