W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > November 2014

Re: [css-pseudo] please make sure pseudo-element "alt" property makes it into next ED

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2014 16:31:46 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDBkArmPxSD1CxFDtxjymezmsU8iq6P=0CNQ7zTjbC6Sw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Daniel Glazman
<daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com> wrote:
> On 05/11/2014 22:17, Alan Stearns wrote:
>
>>> p.new.important::before {
>>>    content: url(warning.png) url(new.png);
>>> }
>>
>>
>> Ah, sorry. I thought you were talking about fallbacks, not more than one
>> image being displayed.
>>
>> I don’t see an issue with this case. You have three selectors setting
>> three different content values. You can easily add three separate alt
>> values. Of course, this works just fine with alt being a separate property
>> *or* being an additional value on the content property (perhaps separated
>> by an 'alt' keyword?)
>
>
> This is something you don't get: the three rules I wrote should not set
> 3 different alt values but 4. The one quoted above does not define one
> single alt but two for two different images. The way a content reader
> will pronounce them is different from "warning new" or "warning. new."
> It will add some mention saying these are two different texts because
> it's important to the listener. So the only possibility for the alt is
> to be carried by the url() notion.

I don't understand.  What do you think is different between
alt-per-url and alt-for-whole thing?

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 6 November 2014 00:39:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:26 UTC