- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 14:58:53 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Cc: Matthew Raymond <mattraymond@earthlink.net>, W3C CSS <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > > > > > No, it won't work, because UAs are still going to have > > > type="datetime" within the DOM, even though they are treating it as > > > type="text". > > > > I think you mean that the DOM property would be "text" while the > > markup would have "date"... > > No, I meant what I said. Check Mozilla's DOM inspector to confirm that > the attribute value in the DOM will match the value written in the > markup. There are three things. The attribute in the markup. It has the value the author gave (obviously). The content attribute accessed via the DOM. It is an in-memory representation of the attribute in the markup and therefore the same. This is what the [type=""] selector matches against. The DOM attribute (JS property) of the same name. Its value depends on the DOM specs. In the case of the <input> element, the value of the DOM attribute "type" is "text" unless the type was actually understood by the UA. This is what Matthem was refering to, and is what his intriguing :dom() pseudo-class would select on. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2005 14:58:57 UTC