- From: Justin Wood (Callek) <116057@bacon.qcc.mass.edu>
- Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 11:06:03 -0400
- To: Bill Talcott <invisibill@invisibill.net>, W3C Style List <www-style@w3.org>
I think you are forgetting one of the key aspects of CSS, that each user can easily add a "User Style Sheet" to take care of any rule(s) he/she does not want as they are defaulted on [x] website, and with Mozilla you can specify it on a per-site basis (without needing the site author to add an ID or a class for their site) * { target-new: something !important; } ;-) ~Justin Wood Bill Talcott wrote: > Regarding > http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-css3-hyperlinks-20040224/#the-target-new ... > > I completely agree with Sam Kearns in > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2004Mar/0007.html. J. > King makes some good points in > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2004Feb/0513.html also. > > While it's open to interpretation whether a new window is better > design-wise, Sam's other points are valid regardless. The target-new > attribute makes some decisions that only the user should decide. The > current target attribute is most often used for popups and opening > links to other sites in new windows. Many people do not want new > windows, so much so that several "single window" extensions have been > written for Firefox (even with its relatively small userbase) to > intercept these new window requests. Personally, I use Firefox but do > not use tabs at all. Am I going to have to wait for the devs to code > in an option to completely disable Firefox's tab system, or get an > extension (similar to the existing single window extensions) that > intercepts new-tab calls? > > As J. King said, "tabs" may be too specific also. There may very well > be browsers released that don't use tabs, or users like myself who > simply don't like them. My OS manages multiple application windows > well, so an additional tab bar in the browser simply takes up screen > space while giving me no additional benefit. As Boris said in his > reply, this seems to cater to one (or a few) browsers. > > So, my alternative. I saw the technique elsewhere, and have started > doing it on my pages. I use rel="external" in external hyperlinks. > This supplies information about the link, stating that it's external. > The browser could then handle "external" links in whatever way the > user specifies - same window, new tab, new window, etc. A clever > browser could even be configured to handle an external link in the > same domain differently (in a new tab, instead of a new window, for > example). Using rel="external" seems to do basically the same thing as > target-new, but I feel that it provides a way to specify a property > which can be handled in one of several ways. A browser could probably > just as easily be coded to intercept target-new and handle it in the > desired way, but that just seems more like making the standard less > diverse and hacking browsers to make up for it. > > While we all tend to think highly of our own ideas, I think the > concept of labelling the type of link and letting the user agent > decide how to handle it is much more in tune with an open standard. I > don't want standards catering to one specific product, even if that > product is considered the best and completely open in every way, > shape, and form.
Received on Monday, 13 September 2004 15:12:40 UTC