W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2003

Re: Scope of :hover

From: Ernest Cline <ernestcline@mindspring.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2003 13:23:16 -0400
To: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <3EDDF2C4.16684.4B67079@localhost>

John Lewis wrote:

> Ernest wrote on Wednesday, June 4, 2003 at 1:18:48 AM:
> > That using :hover to provide a viaual cue to users as to which row
> > and column a table cell belongs to is insufficient as it does not
> > work with non-interactive visual media such as print.
> For print use. What you're saying is that because it doesn't work for
> print it's flat out insufficient. Should we expunge all media-specific
> styles while we're at it?

No, but since the presumed intention for using tr:hover and col:hover 
rules was to provide a visual cue for visual media and since :hover 
does not apply to static visual media, it is insufficient to achieve 
that goal.

> The colors in my screen style sheet are useless in an aural style
> sheet. That just means I shouldn't use color in aural style sheets (or
> rely solely on color for some purpose).
> > The result is a visual guide that works in both interactive and
> > static visual media and is fairly easy for a user to comprehend.
> If you're writing a style sheet for screen use, screen-specific styles
> are acceptable. It's impossible for two media to produce an identical
> user experience, and I don't see why creating a compromise for two
> media is better than creating optimal media-specific styles. Even if
> you had to put everything in a single style sheet for some lame
> reason, you could still use @media rules. What's the advantage of your
> way? (I am specifically not asking about your example in particular,
> but your stated reasonsing for creating such a thing in the first
> place. Your example is fine.)

The advantage is that my method works for a broader set fo media types 
as it works for all visual media types as opposed to only interactive 
visual media types as the :hover example does.  ( :hover doesn't even 
work for all interactive media, since it won't work in pen-based, as 
opposed to mouse-based user agents.)  It doesn't need a screen specific 
style to achieve the same goal.  IMO, a method that works in a broader 
range of media to achieve the same goal is the better one.  That said, 
so long as all visual media are taken care of, I see nothing incorrect 
in providing a method that works specifically for mouse-based 
interactive visual media, tho I would question the utility of making 
the presentation different for different types of visual media when the 
purpose is not to highlight capabilities such as interactivity specific 
to that subgrouping.
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2003 13:23:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:07 UTC