- From: Belov, Charles <Charles.Belov@sfmta.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 12:02:13 -0800
- To: "Daniel Weck" <daniel.weck@gmail.com>
- Cc: <www-style@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: Daniel Weck [mailto:daniel.weck@gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2011 4:15 AM > To: Mark Kenny; www-style@w3.org; Belov, Charles > Subject: Re: [css3-speech] ISSUE-153 speak: none; usage > incompatible with other values of speak > > The latest editor's draft now includes a new 'speakability' > property. > The 'none' value of the 'speak' property has been removed. > Note how "speakability:none" is analogous to "display:none" > (the prose is near- identical). > > Please review [1]. > > Regards, Daniel > > [1] > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-speech/#speaking-props > With the caveat that I don't feel knowledgeable about "auto," the information seems complete and good for me. As for the term, I personally prefer "speakability" as it is similar to "visibility" and thus instantly understandable. It would not be the only CSS property to annoy spell checkers ("nav" annoys mine). But I don't feel strongly enough about it to object to "speaking." I thought about "audibility," but that would imply that silent content still took up time, which is not the case here. Hope this helps, Charles Belov SFMTA Webmaster
Received on Monday, 7 February 2011 20:06:16 UTC