W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2005

Re: Conclusion for :read-only and :read-write?

From: Matthew Raymond <mattraymond@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 16:11:58 -0400
Message-ID: <42FA5F8E.3050506@earthlink.net>
To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
CC: www-style@w3.org

Daniel Glazman wrote:
> Matthew Raymond wrote:
>>http://glazman.org/weblog/dotclear/index.php?2005/08/04/1148-read-write-and-read-only
>>
>>   I guess I'm for Solution 3, with some Solution 1 mixed in. A way to
>>style stuff in various editing contexts is nice, but it shouldn't have
>>anything to do with semantic read-only/read-write states.
> 
> Solution 3 just implies that a browser cannot be used as the ground
> basis for an editor. With my Nvu hat on, I cannot second that choice...

   Not sure what you mean. Clearly, I don't support using the /browser/
as the basis for selector matching. I support using the semantics of the
markup as the basis for matching. (At least in the case of :read-only
and :read-write, that is.) It just so happens that this results in an
outcome that is effectively like Solution 3. Perhaps I wasn't clear
about that.

   I support a way to style based on editing contexts. I just don't want
such styling joined at the hip with read-writability of controls.
Received on Wednesday, 10 August 2005 20:12:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:39 GMT