- From: Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 19:43:50 +0000
- To: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
- Cc: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@chromium.org>, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, "Edward O'Connor" <eoconnor@apple.com>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 29 January 2015 at 19:09, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com> wrote: > composition actually seems to let you express something equally good without > ambiguity more easily except insofar as giving you a really first-class > fallback option if you don't support JS, but... I'm having a really hard > time imagining more than 3-4 cases where that's really a useful thing. I'm thinking of all the HTML elements that people feel compelled to recreate with div soup and JS (some of this is because the CSS hooks don't exist, but I doubt we could ever define all conceivable CSS hooks, but that's another story). The canonical example is <button> but <input type="date" is="fab-calendar"> ; <input type="range" is="rotary-knob">; <input type="checkbox" is="woot-checkbox"> <!-- OMG the checkmark spills outside the box and it's in corporate magenta and indigo! --> All of these degrade very nicely and work even when JS isn't present, whereas <woot-checkbox> and <fab-calendar> don't. I'd also very much like to do <nav is="glorious-accordian"> etc. "a really first-class fallback option if you don't support JS" is vital for the quarter of a billion people who use Opera Mini and the 100 million people who use the Nokia proxy browser. Fallback rather than non-functional pages is vital for the people who don't use latest greatest Chromium or Gecko browsers. Sure, not everyone will do this. But not everyone puts alt text on images; that's not an argument for removing <img alt> from the platform. b
Received on Thursday, 29 January 2015 19:44:18 UTC