- From: Eric Meyer <emeyer@theopalgroup.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 08:57:38 -0500
- To: <www-style@w3.org>
At 22:50 -0800 3/4/01, Ian Hickson wrote: >Mozilla treats elements that are 'visibility: hidden' as if they were not >available for user interaction because it is very bad UI to have invisible >elements react to the user. We decided that good UI was overall a better >aim than the few edge cases. ;-) > >Authors of other UAs probably did the same. An interesting assertion. Why is it bad UI? I can think of at least a few cases where you might want to have invisible elements that can react to the user's input. Actually, my investment in this issue is not to have invisible elements available for interaction (although I think that would be cool) so much as it is to get the specification clarified either in the CSS2 errata or in the appropriate module(s) of CSS3. Just a single sentence is all I ask, really, which says whether or not invisible elements are available for interaction. If they aren't, then add another sentence that defines the point at which semi-opaque elements become (un)available for interaction. -- Eric Meyer Internet Applications Manager e-mail: emeyer@theopalgroup.com The OPAL Group / Technical Services voice: (216) 986-0710 ext. 21 http://www.theopalgroup.com/ fax: (216) 986-0714
Received on Monday, 5 March 2001 08:58:18 UTC