W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2011

Re: [css3-ui] ID selectors as values of nav-{up,right,down,left} properties

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:53:55 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDAhr1JyaOBTTEV-zhqgzWeAxGu1B+ROKU4O4RdUp475Mw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Cc: Eli Morris-Heft <eli.morris.heft@gmail.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, www-style@w3.org
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> wrote:
> On 12/08/11 6:46 AM, Eli Morris-Heft wrote:
>>
>> As an author, even if we are going to use the element(id) notation, I
>> think it would be good to mark the id as an id instead of a keyword by
>> saying element(#bar). It's visually distinctive and clearly marks a
>> different kind of value.
>
> In which case I'm not sure why we wouldn't just use url(#bar), with a
> restriction saying that it must be same document.
>
> element() has the additional functionality of being able to use the CSS
> element map.  I'm not sure how useful that would be for the nav-*
> properties.  (Could be.)

url() resolves relative urls relative to the stylesheet's url, not the
document.  I wouldn't want that behavior to change in some contexts.
element() always resolves against the document (because it's actually
resolving a selector, not a relative url).

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 11 August 2011 23:54:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:43 GMT