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

Re: [Bug 360746] The right panel has disappeared at andrewdupont.net (fwd)

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 15:37:57 +0200
To: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: www-style@w3.org, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Message-ID: <op.tr5z5jdf64w2qv@id-c0020.guest-int.opera.no>

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 11:19:12 +0200, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> Could you address the comments below in the CSSOM spec? Currently the  
> spec is extremely vague about what happens when you mutate the  
> attributes on an element that imports a style sheet.

That's because those are defined in another specification. Like HTML5.


> Also, the spec uses the term "alternate style sheet"; it should probably
> be "alternative style sheet".

Done.


>> 1)  Should a change of "rel" from "alternate stylesheet" to
>> "stylesheet" have any effect?  If so, what?

You mean whether this should re-run the algorithm that decides which style  
sheets to apply? It makes sense to me to have everything "live". It's not  
clear to me which specification should define this.


>> 2)  If an alternate (so disabled) sheet gets enabled via the DOM
>> api and then the <link> is changed such that a new sheet load has
>> to start (change of href, possibly change of rel, possibly change
>> of title, etc), should the new sheet that loads have the same state
>> as the old sheet, or should it be different somehow?

I suppose it would be nice if HTMLStyleElement.disabled was changed  
LinkStyle.sheet.disabled would change and vice versa. Which should solve  
this issue, I think. Any opinions on that?


(I'm willing to define it all in the CSSOM by the way, but (a) I'm not  
sure if it makes sense and (b) I'm unsure how to do it.)


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Friday, 11 May 2007 13:38:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:50 GMT