W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2008

Re: [CSS3] Collapsing elements proposal [wasRe: Collapsing elements]

From: <brkemper@comcast.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 20:44:50 +0000
To: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Cc: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Message-Id: <022720082044.16316.47C5CBC200078D4300003FBC22007589429D0A9F030A059D0D@comcast.net>
One small error in that, is that I've indicated Safari 2 can render it OK. Actually you need Safari 3 (which does still have the problem indicated).


 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Brad Kemper <brkemper@comcast.net>
> 
> On Feb 23, 2008, at 12:15 AM, Brad Kemper wrote:
> 
> > Actually, if the appearance stuff was available, some clever person  
> > could probably figure out a way to create a tab panel with just  
> > existing radio buttons and labels, and maybe a level or two of  
> > spans inside the labels (and maybe a P or fieldset to line  
> > everything up inside of). That'd be an interesting challenge, even  
> > without the tab appearance availability. It seems doable on the  
> > face of it.
> >
> 
> I've created a proof-of-concept, which uses radio buttons, adjacent  
> selectors, and absolute positioning to create a panel of tabs that  
> works. A bug in Safari seems to prevent the selectors from noticing  
> changes to the radio buttons' states. FireFox 2 doesn't work because  
> I am using display:inline-box. But it works perfectly in FireFox 3  
> and Opera 9.26, and initially looks correct in Safari.
> 
> Here it is, if you are interested:
> 
> http://bradclicks.com/cssplay/tabs.html
> 
> ("pure CSS" and functional, no JavaScript involved)
> 
> Ideally, I'd rather not have to use absolute positioning. Maybe  
> someday I could use "move-to" on the content instead (if I remember  
> correctly how that is supposed to work). And I had to use negative  
> margins to collapse the white space; there might be a better way. Oh,  
> and I'd love for "appearance" to support assigning the proper OS UI  
look, but I simulated that instead, in the second example.


attached mail follows:




Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2008 20:45:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:01 GMT