Re: <di>? Please?

AFAIK, styling of any arbitrary element works in all current browsers. So it does not matter whether we talking about DIV or DI.


04.02.2012, 04:12, "François REMY" <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>:
> You are wrong too. DI is not supported now by any browser. So the correct analogy would be: extending float to cover new use cases while we know it's not how it should be done OR create a new layout concept that fulfill the need in a better way.
>
> Since none of them are usable right now, there's a choice to make based on semantic too.
>
> ----------------------------------------
> De : Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com
> Envoyé : 04/02/2012 00:40
> À : Lea Verou
> Cc : www-style@w3.org; Hugh Guiney; whatwg
> Objet : Re: <di>? Please?
>
> 04.02.2012, 03:29, "Lea Verou" <leaverou@gmail.com>:
>> On 4/2/12 00:38, Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com wrote:
>>
>>>  The problem is that it will most likely not be solved via CSS (solved means we have finished CR spec and all browsers supports it) in near 10 years or so, while DIV wrapper work _right now_ in all browsers.
>>
>> The same could be said for anything that currently has some kind of
>> workaround:
>> - Lets not spec variables, we have find & replace.
>> - Lets not spec new layout models, we have floats.
>> - Lets not spec css3-conditional, we have Modernizr.
>> ...
>>
>> --
>> Lea Verou (http://lea.verou.me | @LeaVerou)
>
> The analogies are wrong. We are free to spec anything, but it's not a reason to disallow something that already work in favor of something that does not exist yet.
>
> Correct analogies:
> * disallow floats just because new layout models are in development;
> * disallow using Modernizr since we have unimplemented css3-conditional draft;
> * disallow using find&replace since we have a draft for spec variables.

Received on Saturday, 4 February 2012 00:16:44 UTC