W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2012

Re: [css3-ui] nav-index <number> value

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 11:02:40 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDAfk6p6Z9c6tRnBJ0Ly=ssHLMx2Wp-rArb_gfn5dMNYVg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 6:38 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:
> On Thursday 2012-10-18 10:24 -0700, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> I agree, actually.  However, then we should modify more of the
>> property.  We can't make it "positive numbers", because that's an open
>> range, and we avoid those when possible.  There's a legitimate reason,
>> for this property, to keep a "non-negative" restriction, though -
>> ideally, you shouldn't have to scan the entire document to find out
>> what the first element in tab order is, at least in the common case.
>> So, having a minimum value (either 0 or 1) that's the default makes it
>> possible to just jump to the first element with that value.  It's
>> unfortunate that this means you can't put an element in front without
>> moving *all* the other elements, but that's a tradeoff.
>
> I'm not convinced by that argument.  Tabbing order requires being
> able to go both forwards and backwards, and going backwards requires
> finding the last item quickly.
>
> I'd rather just allow negative values.

Ah, good point.  I forgot that you can tab backwards. :/  In that
case, I withdraw my statements. Let's go for the full number range,
-Inf to +Inf.

> (I think the more important thing we need to address with nav-index
> is adding the ability to establish scopes (rather than requiring all
> the indices to be global), though.)

Yeah.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 19 October 2012 18:03:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:21:01 GMT