W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2007

Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: 3rd call: CSS2: howto disable audio?

From: ~:'' ありがとうございました。 <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 07:56:12 +0100
Message-Id: <10530C69-6201-4AD6-8CB3-EF35237062E3@btinternet.com>
Cc: www-style CSS <www-style@w3.org>
To: jesse@dutchmoney.com


It's true the subject might better be titled howto disable a larger  
range of filetypes...
audio was shorthand. however there are only a limited range of audio  

flash can just as easily contain sound or embedded images on which  
<img> CSS will have no effect.


Jonathan Chetwynd

On 30 Jul 2007, at 19:55, jesse von doom wrote:


I think your argument here actually helps illustrate the problem with  
your idea. <img> does address a limited range of file types, because  
it is an x/html tag specifically intended to display images. Setting:

img {display:none;}

removes the <img> tags from the flow, not all images. (for example:  
backgrounds.) The closest analog for audio is display:none on the  
<object> tag as has been mentioned, but i understand that's not what  
you hope to accomplish.

If you want no audio whatsoever coming from any source from a given  
page, without hindering visual rendering, then you're simply asking  
too much from CSS. That sounds much more like a browser feature,  
rather than styling x/html code. If there were a specific <audio>  
tag, then setting <audio> to display:none would be totally appropriate.

So while I agree it would be nice to be able to silence a browser, I  
feel that you're looking in the wrong place for a solution.


~:'' ありがとうございました。 wrote:
> Sergiu,
> not sure how closely you are following this thread...
> unfortunately as discussed previously display:none has rather too  
> large a remit for a user style sheet.
> that is it is difficult or more likely impossible to limit to a  
> particular file type.
> this contrasts rather strongly with the case of img which  
> specifically addresses  a limited and specific range of file types.
> regards
> Jonathan Chetwynd
> On 30 Jul 2007, at 14:08, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
> ~:'' ありがとうございました。 wrote:
>> David,
>> you fail to address the query you highlight:
>> "Is there a good reason CSS does not cover this issue?"
>> is there a technical or other good reason beyond the historical  
>> artefact is already stated.
>> clearly many users might prefer to hide flash on a site by site  
>> basis via there browser and quite likely a user style sheet.
> You can hide flash by setting display:none on the object or embed  
> element. But you cannot make only the sound inside the flash stop  
> while the flash is a binary entity that does not understand CSS.
>> regards
>> Jonathan Chetwynd
>> On 30 Jul 2007, at 08:33, David Woolley wrote:
>> ~:'' ありがとうございました。 wrote:
>>> this seems to be counter-intuitive, and a resolution by file type  
>>> seems feasible or possibly even near-trivial.
>>> Is there a good reason CSS does not cover this issue?
>> You are taking a view that represents a popular misconception that  
>> web standard define the complete browser as a multimedia  
>> presentation engine, and which leads to people asking about Flash  
>> on www-html.
>> In its original concept, HTML provided glue to ease the navigation  
>> to resources in many different forms.  Commercialisation has led  
>> to something of a compound document concept and special sorts of  
>> links that result in concurrent rendering of linked resources.   
>> However, the fact still remains that, if you link to (embed,  
>> access with object) resources rendered by third party products,  
>> you cannot expect those third party products to fully integrate  
>> with the W3C technologies in the core product.
>> If HTML had been designed as a multimedia presentation tool, it  
>> would be
>> different, but it might also not exist at all, because it would  
>> have been in direct competition with tools better at doing that  
>> job at the time it was invented.
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2007 06:56:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:30 UTC