- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 14:48:55 +0000 (UTC)
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009, Michael A. Puls II wrote: > > > > > > O.K., so put simply, HTML5 should explicitly mention that the css > > > display property for <object>, <embed> (and <applet> in the handling > > > section) has absolutely no effect on plug-in instantiation and > > > destroying and has absolutely no effect on @src and @data resource > > > fetching. > > > > > > HTML5 could also be extra clear by example that display: none > > > doesn't destroy, or prevent the creation of, the plug-in instance > > > and that changing the display value doesn't destroy the instance. > > > > > > Lastly, HTML5 could briefly mention that what the plug-in does when > > > its window/area is not displayed because of display: none, is > > > plug-in and plug-in API dependent. > > > > I've added a note to this effect. > > Also see <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90268#c68>. > Should probably add a note in the spec that the css overflow and > position properties don't affect instantiation/destroying etc. (might as > well add visibility too). And, after that, it'd probably be best to note > that css in general doesn't affect instantiation/destroying (to avoid > having to keep on adding CSS properties to the list) > > Something like this: > > Note: The above algorithm is independent of CSS. For example, it runs > even if the element is hidden or out-of-view because of the 'display', > 'position', 'visibility' and 'overflow' properties. > > Further, changing the value of any CSS property does not cause the above > algorithm to run again on the element. For example, changing the > element's 'display' property from 'inline-block' to 'none' does not > destroy the loaded resource. Fair enough. Done something like the above. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 10 December 2009 06:48:55 UTC