- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:34:08 +0100
- To: Joe D Williams <joedwil@earthlink.net>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, public-html@w3.org
Joe D Williams, Fri, 29 Jan 2010 15:36:37 -0800: Is <hidden> better than @declare/@hidden? [...] >>>>>>>> The hidden attribute is meant to mark a DOM subtree pruned >>>>>>>> from all presentations on all media. > > I am reaching some due to the <iframe with @sandbox and > <sandbox></sandbox> [...] so why not an element? And then you proposed two alternatives to @hidden/@declare: > <head> > <mystuff [space separated strings representing name.id containers > that are to be hidden as quoted above] /> > </head> [...] > Or, in the body > > <hidden> > <htmlstuffthatshouldnotbeincluded... > > </hidden> A <hidden> element could not live up to the benefits of @hidden/@declare, as it would meddle with the DOM. (E.g. consider <hidden><caption></caption></hidden> - doesn't work.) Keeping a list of the hidden elements in the <head> would not meddle with the DOM - but such an extra indirection would complicate things severely. Another issue to consider w.r.t. @hidden/@declare is the earlier discussed the autoplay feature of <video>/<audio>: What happens to <video> if it is @hidden? E.g. does it still load? And so on. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Saturday, 30 January 2010 01:34:42 UTC