- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 21:22:02 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13275
Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jackalmage@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> 2011-07-15 21:22:02 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> I'm not aware of any other case where an element attribute is added into the
> page when scripting is disabled. If the developer is unaware that this happens
> when scripting is disabled, they may remain totally unaware that the control UI
> is being displayed whenever the user accesses the page with scripting disabled.
The attribute is not added. The controls are simply displayed, which happens
to be the same thing that occurs if you set the attribute.
> More importantly, they're not given the option to not have the control UI
> display.
>
> The controls attribute is a boolean attribute, which means when its present,
> display the control UI. It's reasonable to assume, then, that when it isn't
> present, the author or developer does not want the control UI to be present.
>
> By enabling the control UI when the attribute is not listed and scripting is
> disabled, the HTML5 specification is making it impossible to not have a control
> UI whether the author wants one or not. This limits the choices available to
> the author or developer.
Disabling the control UI when there is no possibility of providing custom
controls is almost certainly going to be done accidentally, by an author
assuming that scripting is always on and their script-based controls will be
added, and so just omitting the @controls attribute.
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 15 July 2011 21:22:03 UTC