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

Re: Selectors Tests

From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:30:06 -0800
Message-ID: <491A5BCE.6030604@lachy.id.au>
To: Brad Kemper <brkemper.comcast@gmail.com>
CC: Mikko Rantalainen <mikko.rantalainen@peda.net>, www-style@w3.org

Brad Kemper wrote:
> On Nov 11, 2008, at 4:50 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
>> You haven't explained why this is a real problem.  Links already have 
>> two other pseudo classes that can be used to match them: :link and 
>> :visited, which more accurately reflect the states that a link can be 
>> in.  The :enabled and :disabled pseudo classes clearly weren't 
>> designed to address the link use cases and we have no reason for them to.
> 
> I don't see any reason to not have links that can be enabled and 
> disabled. They are often used in the same sort of roles as buttons and 
> submit inputs.

Allowing links to be disabled would be something for the HTMLWG to 
consider, but it would require clear use cases, and there haven't been 
any presented.  If this was something that authors really wanted, then 
it's very likely that they would have found workarounds, which isn't too 
hard to do.

e.g. Attaching an event listener that cancels the default action when 
clicked, and adding a class name like class="disabled" which can be used 
for styling.  (If authors are doing this, or something else that gives 
equivalent results, then please raise the issue on public-html and 
present the examples.)

The reason to not have them without such use cases is that defining and 
implementing the feature has a cost and that cost needs to be justified. 
  If there aren't any real use cases, then authors aren't going to use 
it and then implementing it would be a waste of time and resources.

-- 
Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
http://lachy.id.au/
http://www.opera.com/
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2008 04:38:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:16 GMT