- From: Brad Kemper <brkemper@comcast.net>
- Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 09:26:40 -0700
- To: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Mar 16, 2008, at 4:50 AM, David Woolley wrote: > > Lorenzo De Tomasi wrote: >> Is it possible with css to select a visible attribute like title="" >> and apply a new style to it? > > I think this is a "how to" question, and therefor off topic, so I > probably shouldn't answer it. > > Conceptually, title is only a visible attribute because your > browser ahs a style sheet rule that generates an absolutely > positioned virtual box based on a selector that includes the > presence of the attribute and :hover status for the parent element. > > I'm not sure that CSS is yet capable of actually representing that > style sheet fragment, but if it were, you would need to either find > out what the browser's relevant user agent style sheet said and put > in appropriate overrides for that, or you would need to essentially > completely redefine that fragment. The latter is particularly > undesirable because it may be completely inconsistent with the > user's browser's way of handling title. Undesirable? So? Authors have the power to control what text, if any, is used in the title attribute, or can leave it blank and generate pseudo-tooltips of their own using some other means. It may be undesirable for you, but fortunately authors do not need to consult you before implementing their choices. I don't think it is unreasonable to follow the same pattern of allowing some restyling of UI elements, and suggest that UAs start implementing tooltips in a way that allows authors to restyle them. You wouldn't need to know the browser's default style sheet. It would presumably look something like this: *[title]:not([title=""):before { content: attr(title); appearance:tooltip } The appearance would include position information, color, font, opacity, box-shadow, etc. Then if an author had a mostly yellow layout, and wanted the tooltip to stand out against it better, the author could change the background color or thicken the border in page's style sheet: *[title]:not([title=""):before { background-color: purple; border- width:3px; } > In practice, GUI browsers don't implement title using style sheets > but either directly use the GUI's tool tip mechanism or simulate IE/ > Windows use of the Windows tooltip mechanism. > > Finally note that HTML only requires that the contents of title be > made available to users to clarify the intent of an element; it > doesn't mandate how that should be done. On a non-GUI browser, it > would be unreasonable, or impossible, to use a popup and the > standard handling on a GUI one might actually be to display the > information in the window or screen status area. All the more reason not to discourage authors from using the title attribute for their hand-rolled tool-tips (currently, an all-CSS solution using the title attribute for the content results in 2 tooltips: the author's styled version, and the automatic UI one). >> For example, in <a href="http://index.html" title="Go to the >> homepage">Homepage</a> > > That's a bad example. Titles are generally nouns, especially for > links, so there is no need for "Go to", and the rest of the title > adds nothing to the link name. Typically, on a link (used in the > role of a link), title should be similar to the contents of the > title element. I think that is a "how to write title tags" answer, and therefor off topic. >> background-color for the 'title box' that appears when i do a >> rollover >> on the link or the image (Firefox default is a black text on a yellow >> background box). > > Black on yellow is the Windows user interface default for tool > tips; I'm not sure if Windows allows you to override that, or if it > does, whether it allows you to override it other than for the whole > user interface. > > (There have been proposals for making tool tips a specific style, > on the base element, rather than constructing them from basic > principles using absolutely positioned generated boxes. I'm not > sure whether those proposals are in CSS3 at the moment.) > > -- > David Woolley > Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want. > RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam, > that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work. >
Received on Sunday, 16 March 2008 16:27:20 UTC