W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > May 2010

[wbs] response to 'ISSUE-93: Removing the details Element - Straw Poll for Objections'

From: WBS Mailer on behalf of 1981km@gmail.com <webmaster@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 02:25:06 +0000
To: 1981km@gmail.com,www-archive@w3.org
Message-Id: <wbs-b5d30163be245fb42cf2890e825a8c82@cgi.w3.org>

The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'ISSUE-93:
Removing the details Element - Straw Poll for Objections' (HTML Working
Group) for Krzysztof Maczy&#324;ski.



---------------------------------
Objections to the Change Proposal to Remove the details Element
----
We have a Change Proposal to remove the details element. If you have
strong objections to adopting this Change Proposal, please state your
objections below.  Keep in mind, you must actually state an objection, not
merely cite someone else. If you feel that your objection has already been
adequately addressed by someone else, then it is not necessary to repeat
it.
Objections: 
1. The CP argues that the same functionality is readily available with
scripting (most notably in multiple libraries). I'm strongly against
applying this reasoning in designing declarative markup languages (which
leads me to being somewhat against this particular CP).

2. The CP and ISSUE's statement propose that dynamic behaviour (and even
hiding anything - but that's far fetched and suggests an oversight of
display: none in CSS and similar possibilities when writing the CP)
shouldn't be possible without scripting. Declaratrive markup languages
already offer it (e.g. XForms, SMIL), so the bridge has been crossed. And
it's a good thing because on the Web arbitrary interaction with content is
the norm, unlike in traditional media.

Note that this element needs much work and I reserve the right to opt for
its removal if this work doesn't yield satisfactory results by the time to
publish LC. In particular, styling model needs to be defined consistently,
the whole approach to boolean attributes is questionable, naming of summary
should probably be revisited and whether it makes sense to have it as any
child, not necessarily the first.




---------------------------------
Objections to the Change Proposal to Keep New Elements and Attributes
----
We have a Change Proposal to keep several newly-introduced semantic
elements, attributes, and controls. If you have strong objections to
adopting this Change Proposal specifically with respect to the details
element, please state your objections below.  Keep in mind, you must
actually state an objection, not merely cite someone else. If you feel that
your objection has already been adequately addressed by someone else, then
it is not necessary to repeat it.
Objections: 



These answers were last modified on 20 May 2010 at 02:24:25 U.T.C.
by Krzysztof MaczyƄski

Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/issue-93-objection-poll/ until
2010-05-19.

 Regards,

 The Automatic WBS Mailer
Received on Thursday, 20 May 2010 02:25:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:30 GMT