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

RE: activel inks?

From: Manos Batsis <m.batsis@bsnet.gr>
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 13:38:30 +0300
Message-ID: <A35E2040C17F0C48B941B8F4D0DF122908E2C6@ermhs.Athens.BrokerSystems.gr>
To: "AMollah" <am@freephone.fsnet.co.uk>
Cc: <www-style@w3.org>

Ok ok.A consideration, in case inclusion of :current in the css spec is
decided.

So suppose we have 
 a {
color : #000000;
}

a:current{
font-weight:bold;
}

a:hover{
font-weight : bold;
}

a:visited{
color : #c0c0c0;
}

This works fine. But it does so because :current and :hover have the
same attribute/value pair. But what if:

a:current{
color:red;
}

a:hover{
color:green;
}

The hover effect on the :current link will give the wrong impression
that this is *not* a current link.

IMHO, this is an interaction issue. Should a :current also have :hover?

Possible solution mechanisms:

1) Remove the ability of :hover from a :current link.

2) Leave the responsibility of this to the author, who should give the
same styling in both :current and :hover (possibly by grooping).

3) Do not include a :current pseudoclass in the spec. Instead, extend
the :hover state to include :current links.

Ok, I'm overdoing it.

About  :external, maybe a discussion on what is external and what not
should take place.
For example, if I am in 

http://manos.org/main

and the link points to 

http://work.manos.org/whatever

is it external?

Kindest regards,

Manos




> -----Original Message-----
> From: AMollah [mailto:am@freephone.fsnet.co.uk]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 1:18 PM
> To: Manos Batsis
> Cc: www-style@w3.org
> Subject: Re: activel inks?
> 
> 
> Thanks again Manos,
> 
> Yes I know now N6 works for :hover (and other css better than 
> IE5x) - my
> installation wasn't right. I'm sorry I was just being lazy with the
> newsgroup - I thought the link on w3.org would set up a new 
> newsserver in
> outlook. That authoring newsgroup doesn't deal with issues 
> like talking
> about what the css spec should include though, are there any?
> 
> Ian Hickson made me realise I was being a little narrow 
> minded with the
> :active property, of course it doesn't just apply to links 
> and there are
> other situations in which it is more useful (like forms). But 
> in relation to
> links in particular I would find it much more useful to know 
> that a link was
> to the current page than to be told that I had clicked on it 
> (if the link is
> highlighted with hover it isn't that difficult to tell you've 
> clicked on
> it). And even if I wanted to be told that I had clicked on 
> it, and this
> applies to forms too, I think the :focus property would be 
> more useful than
> :active because it would continue telling me that I had 
> clicked on it even
> if I clicked on it for only a short while (it might prevent 
> me submitting
> the form twice). Finding what you are about to click on using 
> hover is very
> important though.
> 
> I agree with you that BeCss is a good way for making css 
> extensible so that
> weird ideas can be implemented independently, but I think 
> this issue still
> boils down not to whether there is a possible method for 
> doing what I want
> to do (which of course there usually is in anything), but to 
> whether you
> think the ":current" property as I have described it is an 
> esoteric or weird
> property or whether you think it is of such general 
> application that it
> ought to be a basic property. Similarly with 
> external/internal links. Is
> this right?
> 
> Best Wishes,
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 3 July 2001 06:39:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:10 GMT