W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2001

Re: opacity in css

From: Tim Bagot <tsb-w3-style-0002@earth.li>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 00:59:01 +0000 (UTC)
To: "'www-style@w3.org'" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0104190033490.13905-100000@windle.hack>
At 2001-04-19T10:11+1000, Brett Donald wrote:-

> What I was wondering was, whether it makes more sense to merge the proposed
> 'opacity' property with the existing 'visibility' property. Essentially, the
> two names are describing the same mechanism, its just that up until now,
> we've thought of visibility as being only on or off, not a continuum. We
> have 'visibility: hidden' and 'visibility: visible', so why not also allow
> percentages like 'visibility: 0%', 'visibility: 100%' and 'visibility: 50%'.
> Then there would be no need for a separate opacity property.

This is probably more or less true, if and only if the visibility property
should have no effect on the availability of elements for user
interaction. I feel that it probably ought to (and certainly must in the
case of collapse); there is (IMO) no sensible way for opacity to, so this
would destroy the equivalence. (One might draw an analogy with the speak
and volume properties, but I'm not sure how useful this is.) Keeping the
two properties separate might also be more convenient for dynamic effects.

Tim Bagot
Received on Wednesday, 18 April 2001 20:59:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:57 UTC