- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 15:25:48 -0800
- To: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 3:09 PM, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote: > On Nov 15, 2012, at 2:48 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:13 PM, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote: >>> An alternate solution, that was proposed off-list, was for CSS to offer another property to indicate whether the value of the content property was considered decorative or not. >>> >>> .expandable:before { >>> content: "\25BA"; /* a.k.a. ► */ >>> generated-content: decorative; /* something like this? like adding aria-hidden="true", but applied to the psuedo-element */ >>> } >> >> In this vein, I'm not opposed to a similar approach, where we define >> an "alt" property that only applies to pseudo-elements and takes a >> <string> as its value. The presence of 'alt' means that 'content' is >> decorative, and you should read 'alt' instead. Absence means you >> should read 'content' as normal. > > Just to be clear, you're talking about this, right? > > .expandable:before { > content: "\25BA"; /* a.k.a. ► */ > alt: ""; /* aria-expanded="false" already in DOM, so this pseudo-element is decorative */ > } > > And this: > > .new:before { > content: "\2730"; > alt: attr(data-new); /* allows for localized content from the DOM, e.g. @data-new="New!" */ > } > > I think that sounds okay, but have a few questions: > > 1. Should the 'alt' property only apply when content has been replaced, or would it apply at all times? > > .foo:before { alt: "This text only available to assistive technology?"; } /*e.g., no visibly rendered content for the pseudo-element. */ If 'content' isn't set to a non-"none" value, the pseudo-element isn't generated at all, so no. > 2. Would you also expect this to override content of native DOM elements, rather than just pseudo-elements? > > <foo style="alt:'baz';">bar</foo> <!-- Potentially confusing to authors. I'm not sure it'd be a good idea on actual elements. --> No, just pseudo-elements. Specifically, just ::before and ::after for now. > PS. How should I track this request? File a bug? WG Issue? We track these things through WG email, so you're already covered. ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 15 November 2012 23:26:35 UTC