- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 09:25:09 +0000 (UTC)
On Wed, 11 Feb 2009, Rikkert Koppes wrote:
>
> However, reading the previous text (in the quoted mail below) again, it
> occurs to me that was actually intended was "A disabled control can
> still match this pseudo-class; the [disabled and read-write] states are
> orthogonal."
>
> In that sense, the current text is quite a shift.
Yeah, this was done to line up more closely with CSS3 UI's definitions. I
don't really think they make sense, but it's not HTML5's place to go
against what the CSSWG decided.
> furthermore, some text remarks at [1]
> - on the read-write definition, first bullet, immutable already includes
> disabled controls [2]
Fixed.
> text remarks at [2]
> - on the note ("The readonly attribute can also in some cases make an input
> element immutable."): in which cases not? [3] seems to imply all cases, this
> should be made clear at the note.
It doesn't, e.g., make a radio button immutable. I'm not sure how to make
it clearer without repeating spec text over and over though.
Cheers,
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2009 01:25:09 UTC