W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2011

[whatwg] Styling <details>

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 12:56:13 -0700
Message-ID: <BANLkTin2PFheQc96ua6-WQyX=a5j4qr0xA@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela at cs.tut.fi> wrote:
> Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>
>> <details> is definitely something we want to make fully
>> author-stylable.
>
> I don?t. Who?s this ?we? you are talking about, and why do they want to make
> <details> author-stylable even before a single browser has _any_ support to
> the element, at the functional level?

"We" being, I suspect, the browser community.  If that's overreaching,
then I'm content to say that *I* want it to be fully author-stylable,
but I believe Moz feels similarly (Tantek is working on making the
form controls more author-stylable).


>>> Why should we use list-style-type for something that clearly ain?t
>>> no list?
>>
>> Because it appears that the disclosure triangle wants to have the same
>> behavior that ::marker does.
>
> Does it? Why do you imply the visual concept of a ?disclosure triangle?, and
> how does that relate to the behavior proposed for ?::marker? in some draft?

I don't understand the question.  However, the default visual behavior
of <details> is suggested in the HTML spec.


>> Don't be misled by the name - all that
>> list-style-type does is help construct the default value for 'content'
>> on ::marker. ?It has nothing to do with things that are semantically
>> lists, per se.
>
> I know that many CSS property names are misleading. But list-style-type, as
> defined in published CSS recommendations, isn?t bound to any ?::marker?.

It certainly is, in the Lists spec.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 8 April 2011 12:56:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 January 2013 18:48:03 GMT