- From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:30:06 -0800
- To: Brad Kemper <brkemper.comcast@gmail.com>
- CC: Mikko Rantalainen <mikko.rantalainen@peda.net>, www-style@w3.org
Brad Kemper wrote: > On Nov 11, 2008, at 4:50 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: >> You haven't explained why this is a real problem. Links already have >> two other pseudo classes that can be used to match them: :link and >> :visited, which more accurately reflect the states that a link can be >> in. The :enabled and :disabled pseudo classes clearly weren't >> designed to address the link use cases and we have no reason for them to. > > I don't see any reason to not have links that can be enabled and > disabled. They are often used in the same sort of roles as buttons and > submit inputs. Allowing links to be disabled would be something for the HTMLWG to consider, but it would require clear use cases, and there haven't been any presented. If this was something that authors really wanted, then it's very likely that they would have found workarounds, which isn't too hard to do. e.g. Attaching an event listener that cancels the default action when clicked, and adding a class name like class="disabled" which can be used for styling. (If authors are doing this, or something else that gives equivalent results, then please raise the issue on public-html and present the examples.) The reason to not have them without such use cases is that defining and implementing the feature has a cost and that cost needs to be justified. If there aren't any real use cases, then authors aren't going to use it and then implementing it would be a waste of time and resources. -- Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software http://lachy.id.au/ http://www.opera.com/
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2008 04:38:32 UTC