W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > May 2017

Re: [csswg-drafts] [selectors] :read-only and :read-write

From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 02 May 2017 19:24:29 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-298735321-1493753068-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 6:51 AM, Stuart Ballard <notifications@github.com> wrote:
> From my (admittedly HTML-centric) perspective as a web developer using CSS, there's a definite use case for these pseudo-classes, but changing their meaning slightly would make them far more useful.
>
> I see them as useful to allow a selector to match all text entry elements in HTML, which is otherwise not possible. The linked article can only suggest variations on this fundamentally flawed approach:

They don't do that, tho. As the SO answers state, :read-write doesn't
match disabled form controls (tho it does in Chrome, at least), while
it *does* match <textarea>, which isn't what you want.

[snip]
> As currently specified, the :read-write pseudo gets partway to meeting this need, but does not offer a way to match readonly (other than a [readonly] attribute selector) or disabled text inputs because :read-only is defined too broadly.
>
> I would suggest changing the specification of :read-only to match only elements that could support :read-write but are currently readonly or disabled.

Regardless of how we decide this, it won't support your use-case properly.


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/127#issuecomment-298735321 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 2 May 2017 19:24:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 10:12:53 UTC