- From: Matthew Raymond <mattraymond@earthlink.net>
- Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 03:10:17 -0400
Jim Ley wrote: > On 9/2/05, Matthew Raymond <mattraymond at earthlink.net> wrote: >>1) Why wouldn't you want the content in the element to be inserted by >>Javascript when the page loads when you can just include the content in >>markup and hide it using CSS? > > Not particularly wanting to support the OP's issue - I don't see a > problem with the change to the content model of a to require content, > it's a good thing. However styling a link to print away is not a good > idea, as it means those without css get a link which does nothing, Nothing in a print out does anything. If you're using events like |onbeforeprint| and |onafterprint|, CSS is still good as a fallback for browsers that support CSS but not the events. Then again, the user could just do this: | // Code to prepare the DOM for printing. | window.print(); | // Code to restore the DOM after printing. That's, of course, assuming that window.print() halts the script until it's complete. Then again, if the browser is printing from a static copy of the DOM rather than the DOM itself, it may not matter. I guess it depends on how window.print() is defined and what the implementation does. > of > course it's still possible with the method in the OP's post that the > user gets a nothing link, but that doesn't mean the link existing in > the source is a good idea. How many user agents support Javascript but not CSS1? Does Lynx or some other text-mode browser support Javascript? I'll have to look into that... >>3) How does your original example even prevent the content from being >>viewed when printing? > > I don't think that's the purpose, I think the purpose is to ensure > there's not content in the page which is purely behavioural and does > nothing when script is not available. Makes sense. Personally, I'm wondering why you want to print from a link at all unless you want to perform a special print operation.
Received on Saturday, 3 September 2005 00:10:17 UTC