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

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

From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 22:36:18 +0200
Message-ID: <42FA6542.1040401@disruptive-innovations.com>
To: www-style@w3.org

Matthew Raymond wrote:

>    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 thought I demonstrated quite clearly on my blog that the markup is
not sufficient to infer anything global about the read-only or
read-write state because the context of the markup instance also
matters, but apparently I was wrong to think that demo was enough.
What do I know, I'm only working on my 4th wysiwyg stylesheet-based
markup editor after all...

</Daniel>
Received on Wednesday, 10 August 2005 20:35:05 GMT

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