- From: Ashley Sheridan <ash@ashleysheridan.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2010 10:14:35 +0000
On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 01:56 -0800, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > On Mar 2, 2010, at 1:41 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > > > 2) I do not believe the proposed rule is a good default for either > > documents or applications. It looks ugly. I randomly checked 10 of > > the sites I browse most often and I could not find a single one that > > explicitly added this rule for the browsers that don't have it. > > What's more, I could not find a single one that retained it for > > images. This rule is just a vestigial artifact that Web developers > > have to work around. > > I partially take it back, news.google.com and images.google.com > deliberately add blue borders to image links. However they do not use > a default border (it's 1px instead of 2px for one thing). > > - Maciej > I agree with David Baron on this. The majority of browsers render images within links as having a border (which is the image highlight equivalent of a text underline when you think about it in context). Having some default expected behavior would be nice to see in a spec, even if the majority of websites actually override it. Having it in a spec will remain consistent with the older browser implementations, and may serve as a guideline as to exactly what should be expected. Besides, like you say Maciej, most website devs override this rule anyway, so it won't actually break anything, it would just clarify what is already happening. Thanks, Ash http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20100302/13021456/attachment.htm>
Received on Tuesday, 2 March 2010 02:14:35 UTC