W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2014

Re: [whatwg] summary/details - proposal

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 19:50:51 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+ri+V=L2zFSrr3RWwdSD1Vh3fjz3SiUQvh9ucYTayRn=LczpA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: whatwg <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>
--

Regards

SteveF
HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>


On 6 April 2014 21:08, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Sun, 6 Apr 2014, Steve Faulkner wrote:
> > On 6 April 2014 05:11, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> > > On Sat, 5 Apr 2014, Steve Faulkner wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The <summary> itself is not interactive, so only the triangle
> > > > provides the actionable control.
> > >
> > > The spec doesn't disallow making clicks on (non-interactive) parts of
> > > the summary defer to the disclosure triangle. Browsers should just
> > > match platform conventions, where applicable, and otherwise make
> > > whatever is considered the best choice for users (such as making such
> > > content also trigger the disclosure triangle).
> >
> > Platform conventions for disclosure type widgets vary, on windows for
> > example, the current implementations match the convention.
>
> The conventions on Windows are all over the place:
>
>    http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa511487.aspx
>
> ...but I doubt that this matches any of the Windows conventions:
>
> | when the summary element includes other interactive elements (as it is
> | allowed to), clicking on them results in the details element being
> | opened/closed
>

Not what I said, but the current implementations use of <summary> as the
interactive element matches, the first example under usage patterns
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa511487.aspx#patterns


>
>
> > > > <details>
> > > > <summary id=x> <label for=x>Foo</label> </summary>
> > > >  ...
> > > > </details>
> > >
> > > That's way more complicated than necessary for authors,
> >
> > how so?
>
> All that should be necessary is:
>
>  <details>
>   <summary> Foo </summary>
>   ...
>  </details>
>
> Adding two attributes and an elements is thus more complicated than
> necessary. This seems pretty unambiguous to me.
>

for the case

<details>
  <summary> Foo  <input> Bar  </summary>
  ...
 </details>


whats the disclosure label?

what about?

<details>
  <summary> <label><input> Bar  </label></summary>
  ...
 </details>



> > in the absence of browser making "clicks on (non-interactive) parts of
> > the summary defer to the disclosure triangle." how is an author supposed
> > to do this?
>
> The author isn't supposed to do this. The whole point of semantic controls
> like this is that the user agent is the one that picks the user interface.
>

does this also extend to the author being able to provide an accessible
name for the control?



>
> Once we start talking about custom widgets, we're in the space of Web
> components, at which point the author can do whatever the author wants.
>

yeah, its a shame that the design of some html features don't provide the
flexibility to allow authors to fix user agent specific design deficits
without recourse to web components


>
> --
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
>
Received on Monday, 7 April 2014 18:51:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:09:28 UTC