- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 22:03:33 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12365 Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-i | |ua.no --- Comment #2 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> 2011-03-22 22:03:33 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > If "every functionality [is] left to script", then we aren't actually creating > a "more appropriate element" than just letting authors use data-* attributes. It depends on what you mean by "appropriate". I was thinking "if the spec says you should use attribute x for feature y", then attribute x is more appropriate. I believe that that is the spirit of the spec text regarding data-*. That said, I am open to add more to @fullsize than simply @data-fullsize. But I don't think we need to add very much. E.g. @fullsize - unlike @cite - don't need any user interface. It only needs a DOM interface - a DOM interface that it similar to that of @cite. But if vendors are willing to add more ... Certainly Mr Wilson wanted more. But Wilson also said that the idea, because of that, was dismissed by Ian. -- 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 Tuesday, 22 March 2011 22:03:35 UTC