- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 21:20:56 +0100
- To: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Smylers, Tue, 2 Feb 2010 19:30:26 +0000:
> Leif Halvard Silli writes:
>> Maciej Stachowiak, Mon, 01 Feb 2010 00:28:39 -0800:
>>> On Feb 1, 2010, at 12:15 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>>>> On Jan 29, 2010, at 17:49, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>>
>>>> HTML5 "hidden" is mostly redundant with "aria-hidden". It provides
>>>> three differences: 1) "hidden" will eventually have UA style sheet
>>>> support.
>>
>> (1) What does style sheet support in regard to "hidden" mean?
>
> Note that Maciej
Henri.
> said specifically "UA style sheet support", not that
> author style-sheets will be able to do anything with it.
>
>> Will we be able to display the semantically hidden element despite
>> that is hidden?
>
> As I understand it, authors will not, for that would defeat the purpose
> of hidden -- which isn't a styling thing, but a matter of whether the
> content currently applies to the user.
This must eventually be specified.
I think Henri answered the question: How will UAs implement support for
@hidden? And that the answer was: By applying a default stylesheet
which probably only says *[hidden]{display:none}. Authors - and users -
are always able to overwrite anything that is implemented via CSS - as
long as the feature has an "author interface", at least. (If not, then
it is outside the CSS specification, I believe.)
Until UAs start to support @hidden - then authors must take care of
this issue themselves. It would perhaps be strange if implementing this
feature made authors loose the ability to style hidden elements
themselves?
And, again, there is no difference between aria-hidden and hidden, I
believe: UAs of the AT media type(s) must also implement aria-hidden
via UA CSS.
--
leif halvard silli
Received on Tuesday, 2 February 2010 20:21:30 UTC