Re: css3-selectors Summary of Comment

Thank you for your responses to us. The PFWG accepts your disposition of
all the comments below. Michael

fantasai wrote:
> Janina Sajka wrote:
>> The Protocols and Formats Wg has the following comments regarding
>> Selectors Level 3 last call at
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-css3-selectors-20090310. PF thanks Cynthia
>> Shelly of Microsoft for leading our review of this draft, and we
>> apologize for our late response to this last call.
>
> Thank you for your review of the Selectors Level 3 last call.
> The CSS Working Group responds as follows.
>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> Pseudoclasses:
>> We ask that there be support for ARIA states and properties [1] as
>> pseudoclasses.
>> Many of these are similar to things that are currently supported as
>> pseudoclasses,
>> in that they can be set in multiple ways.  For example, "checked" can
>> be set
>> from an HTML attribute, from aria-checked, or by user action.  It is
>> useful for
>> a CSS author to be able to style all checked things the same,
>> regardless of how
>> they came to be checked.   Ask whether the CSS WG thinks it's better
>> to make that
>> part of the selectors spec, part of the ARIA spec, or something
>> else.  Is there
>> an extensibility mechanism for psudoclasses.
>
> The CSS Working Group considers this request out-of-scope for Selectors.
> Selectors doesn't define when an element is in the "checked" state, only
> that a ':checked' pseudo-class matches when the element is in a "checked"
> state. It is up to the document language, whether that be defined by the
> DocBook spec or by a combination of HTML5+DOM3+SVG+ARIA, to define when
> an element is in the checked state.
>
>> Hover, active, focus:  All elements should be able to take those states.
>> Any element that receives focus should be able to make use of those.
>> With ARIA and with HTML 5, any element can be focusable.  Before that,
>> form elements and buttons are also focusable.
>
> While Selectors recognizes that there may be document language or
> implementation-specific limits on which elements can be :active
> or acquire :focus, it does not impose any such limits. If ARIA+HTML5
> defines all elements to be focusable, then the :focus pseudo-class
> can potentially apply to any element in the document.
>
>> ::before and ::after may offer a work-around to accessibility issues
>> with generated content not being in the DOM.  PFWG thinks this is a
>> useful feature and wants to see it supported.
>
> The CSSWG also wants to see ::before and ::after supported. :) (There
> are already multiple implementations of this feature, btw.)
>
>> What was the ::selection pseudo-element, and why was it removed?  From
>> its name it seems it could be quite useful for ARIA-based applications,
>> which manage their own selection.
>
> The ::selection pseudo-element allowed the styling of a selection, e.g.
> changing the highlight and text color. It was removed because the details
> of its behavior were poorly defined, and would take significant effort to
> work out; also implementations would then have to converge on those
> details.
> The CSS Working Group felt it was more important to complete Selectors
> Level 3, since all other features in the draft were well-supported,
> and to
> defer ::selection to a future module such as Selectors Level 4. There is
> interest in pursuing this feature, but not in this draft.
>
> Please let us know if this adequately addresses your comments.
>
> ~fantasai
>
>

-- 

Michael Cooper
Web Accessibility Specialist
World Wide Web Consortium, Web Accessibility Initiative
E-mail cooper@w3.org <mailto:cooper@w3.org>
Information Page <http://www.w3.org/People/cooper/>