- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 07:59:16 +0000 (UTC)
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004, Matthew Raymond wrote: > > > > > > "An unassociated <label> element has no semantic meaning." > > > > It's a label. It just doesn't label anything. I don't see any reason > > to say that it stops being a label just because it isn't labelling > > anything. > > I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one. A <label> could, in > theory, have a different default styling depending on what kind of > control it's associated with. For instance, under Windows XP, a radio > button label has a dotted (or dashed?) border around it when the control > is selected. However, the same does not hold true for labels of > textboxes, even though they may still have access keys. > > Without an associated control, the control should probably just inherit > the text styling, background, et cetera of the parent. Otherwise, the > user agent vendor has to figure out what the default style should be > without a point of reference in the OS. In fact, labels in many > operating systems are just blocks of text, so treating unassociated > <label> elements as nothing more than a kind of <span> element is > probably best for most platforms. Do you think the current text is ok in this regard? -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 17 November 2008 23:59:16 UTC