- From: ~:'' ありがとうございました。 <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 07:56:12 +0100
- To: jesse@dutchmoney.com
- Cc: www-style CSS <www-style@w3.org>
jesse, It's true the subject might better be titled howto disable a larger range of filetypes... audio was shorthand. however there are only a limited range of audio filetypes. flash can just as easily contain sound or embedded images on which <img> CSS will have no effect. regards Jonathan Chetwynd On 30 Jul 2007, at 19:55, jesse von doom wrote: Jonathan, I think your argument here actually helps illustrate the problem with your idea. <img> does address a limited range of file types, because it is an x/html tag specifically intended to display images. Setting: img {display:none;} removes the <img> tags from the flow, not all images. (for example: backgrounds.) The closest analog for audio is display:none on the <object> tag as has been mentioned, but i understand that's not what you hope to accomplish. If you want no audio whatsoever coming from any source from a given page, without hindering visual rendering, then you're simply asking too much from CSS. That sounds much more like a browser feature, rather than styling x/html code. If there were a specific <audio> tag, then setting <audio> to display:none would be totally appropriate. So while I agree it would be nice to be able to silence a browser, I feel that you're looking in the wrong place for a solution. jvd ~:'' ありがとうございました。 wrote: > Sergiu, > not sure how closely you are following this thread... > unfortunately as discussed previously display:none has rather too > large a remit for a user style sheet. > that is it is difficult or more likely impossible to limit to a > particular file type. > this contrasts rather strongly with the case of img which > specifically addresses a limited and specific range of file types. > regards > Jonathan Chetwynd > On 30 Jul 2007, at 14:08, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote: > ~:'' ありがとうございました。 wrote: >> >> David, >> >> you fail to address the query you highlight: >> "Is there a good reason CSS does not cover this issue?" >> is there a technical or other good reason beyond the historical >> artefact is already stated. >> >> clearly many users might prefer to hide flash on a site by site >> basis via there browser and quite likely a user style sheet. >> > You can hide flash by setting display:none on the object or embed > element. But you cannot make only the sound inside the flash stop > while the flash is a binary entity that does not understand CSS. >> regards >> >> Jonathan Chetwynd >> >> >> >> On 30 Jul 2007, at 08:33, David Woolley wrote: >> >> >> ~:'' ありがとうございました。 wrote: >> >>> this seems to be counter-intuitive, and a resolution by file type >>> seems feasible or possibly even near-trivial. >>> Is there a good reason CSS does not cover this issue? >> >> You are taking a view that represents a popular misconception that >> web standard define the complete browser as a multimedia >> presentation engine, and which leads to people asking about Flash >> on www-html. >> >> In its original concept, HTML provided glue to ease the navigation >> to resources in many different forms. Commercialisation has led >> to something of a compound document concept and special sorts of >> links that result in concurrent rendering of linked resources. >> However, the fact still remains that, if you link to (embed, >> access with object) resources rendered by third party products, >> you cannot expect those third party products to fully integrate >> with the W3C technologies in the core product. >> >> If HTML had been designed as a multimedia presentation tool, it >> would be >> different, but it might also not exist at all, because it would >> have been in direct competition with tools better at doing that >> job at the time it was invented. >>
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2007 06:56:32 UTC