- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 09:53:13 -0800
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- CC: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Patrick Garies <pgaries@fastmail.us>, www-style@w3.org
Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>
> Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
>>> This can't happen.
>>
>> This needs to be specified then.
>
> It is.
Where it is?
>
>> :enabled and :disabled are mutually exclusive in all domains CSS is
>> aimed to serve.
>
> They are, but you can have elements that neither applies to.
>
>> It means that either one :enabled or :disabled is just enough for
>> practical needs.
>>
>> input:not(:enabled) { color:gray; }
>>
>> why do you need :disabled then?
>
> How would you style all disabled controls on your web page?
>
> input:not(:enabled), textarea:not(:enabled), select:not(:enabled)
>
> isn't so readable. And if you happen to have an XHTML document with
> XForms tossed in, it's not even correct.
>
Beg my pardon but this:
input:not(:enabled), textarea:not(:enabled), select:not(:enabled) {}
is generally nonsense. Because of distinctly different display model of
these elements you will end up with:
input[type=checbox]:not(:enabled) { ... }
input[type=text]:not(:enabled) { ... }
I suspect that your mental modal of :enabled/:disabled pair is better
definable as:
:input/:disabled
Where *:input matches all input elements: input, select, textarea,
object, etc. E.g. :input will match <textarea> but not <a href>
--
Andrew Fedoniouk.
http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Friday, 7 November 2008 17:53:55 UTC