- From: Mikko Rantalainen <mikko.rantalainen@peda.net>
- Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 13:04:32 +0200
- To: www-style@w3.org
- Message-ID: <49181540.8070000@peda.net>
Boris Zbarsky wrote: > Mikko Rantalainen wrote: >> Perhaps the spec should forget about using ":enabled". The current spec says >> "The :enabled pseudo-class represents user interface >> elements that are in an enabled state; such elements >> have a corresponding disabled state." >> >> I consider the words "user interace" as the most important part of that >> definition. As such, I'd specify ":interactive" as any content that >> behaves like some kind of interactive element (e.g. control interface) >> regardless of its current state (disabled or not). > > There is a subtle definitional difference here. For example <a > href="..."> would match your definition of :interactive but does NOT > match the current definition of :enabled (on purpose). Why is that? I see that I'm not the only one that's not expecting this. Andrew Fedoniouk assumed that :enabled would cover "<a>, <object>/<embed>, <frame>,<frameset>, <input>, <select>, <textarea>" by default which is pretty much a list of interactive elements. (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Nov/0117.html) As I see it, links are interactive elements and they probably should be considered as enabled because I can tab to those (so they can get focus). They probably count as a special case that can be styled different from some other interactive elements. -- Mikko
Received on Monday, 10 November 2008 11:05:14 UTC