- From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 22:59:18 +1100
- To: James Graham <james@hoppipolla.co.uk>
- Cc: public-html <public-html@w3.org>
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:39 PM, James Graham <james@hoppipolla.co.uk> wrote: > On 16/10/13 12:07, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > >> So, in your opinion, should we change >> >> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/dom.html#embedding-custom-non-visible-data-with-the-data-*-attributes >> to only apply to private attributes, >> >> and add to >> >> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/infrastructure.html#extensibility >> the suggestion to use a custom prefix xxx-* for libraries? > > > Maybe I should read more context here, yup ;-) > but that's exactly what data- is > already for. If you embed a library in your page, your page isn't > independent of that library and so the library doesn't count as "software > that is independent of the site that uses the attributes". That clause is > supposed to forbid using data-* for e.g. microformats where one might write > microformat-consuming software that is entirely decoupled from the site the > markup appears on. > > Given this, I don't understand why you would want xxx-foo rather than > data-xxx-foo. Because libraries have not followed that advice, e.g. Angular uses ng-* and the web components spec are not following that advice either. Silvia.
Received on Wednesday, 16 October 2013 12:00:09 UTC