- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 16:41:28 +0100
- To: "DOM WG" <www-dom@w3.org>, François REMY <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>
On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 18:27:35 +0100, François REMY <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr> wrote: > I indeed started a CSS draft that doesn't reference the features > described here. I just feel (and I wasn't alone) that DOM and CSS should > keep parity here if we want to implement that feature. It's not possible > to define such pseudo-classes if you don't define progress events in the > DOM, whatever they are, because we need an event to trigger pseudo-class > "rematching". Since when is that the case? It might not be a bad idea, but CSS is typically defined independently of pretty much anything else. > In fact, what we need is some way to "know" how far the download process > is gone for any element which can trigger a download. I may want, in the > future, to simplify that proposal to only include really needed > components, but I feel that many of what I propose is requierd. As I mentioned, you should integrate with http://www.whatwg.org/html#fetch most likely. > Anyway, if you want to see my "contributor draft", it's located here : > http://fremycompany.com/TR/2012/ED-css-content-state/ It's probably best to let specifications such as HTML define when the pseudo-classes apply instead of the other way around. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Monday, 20 February 2012 15:42:04 UTC