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

Re: activel inks?

From: AMollah <am@freephone.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 06:12:27 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <010201c103a9$67006500$0401a8c0@localnet>
To: "Manos Batsis" <m.batsis@bsnet.gr>
Cc: <www-style@w3.org>
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 Wednesday, 4 July 2001 11:01:14 GMT

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