- From: dolphinling <lists@dolphinling.net>
- Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 13:55:04 -0500
- To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- CC: shelby@coolpage.com, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > Shelby Moore wrote: > >> Boris Zbarsky wrote: >> >>> With XBL bound via CSS, you can (and probably should, for the use >>> case we're discussing) do: >>> >>> select[type="select-a-country"] { binding: url(map.xml); } >> >> >> Yes, but nothing stopping the coder from doing: >> >> select { binding: url(map.xml); } > > > What's the problem with that? That doesn't alter the semantics of the > select element in any way whatsoever, and (assuming this is an (X)HTML > select element) it still semantically represents a form control for the > user to select 1 or more items (depending on the multiple attribute). > The presentation of the control, whether it is presented as a drop down > list, a set of radio buttons, check boxes, a world map or anything else > you can possibly imagine for the user to interact with, has absolutely > no affect upon the *semantics* of the element. > > If it did, then, would you say this is wrong: > > h1 { color: green; } > > By your logic, it would be, because the h1 element is not marked up as > being a *green* heading, in which case we may as well go back to using > <font> elements. My point is, again, that a select element presented as > a drop down list has no semantic difference from the same element > presented in another way. I don't think that's quite what he's saying. I think the analogous case would be you have to declare the h1 to be about leaves, and _then_ you can style it to be green. (The original being you have to declare the select to be about countries, and then you can style it like a map.) Is this right? -- dolphinling <http://dolphinling.net/>
Received on Thursday, 24 November 2005 18:55:42 UTC