W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2015

Re: [css3-ui] bringing back 'user-select' (issue 50)

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 13:51:57 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBMdN5fjvuCeYY+q-jg4dh2Rubmcnu7Ucj=mGOozVp6+A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com>, Mats Palmgren <mats@mozilla.com>, Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>, "Edward O'Connor" <eoconnor@apple.com>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote:
>> On 06 Dec 2014, at 11:52, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote:
>>> On 06 Dec 2014, at 09:43, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> After reading fantasai and Ryosuke's replies, and talking to a few
>>> people, I changed my opinion to not to define this in CSS UI at least
>>> in Level 3.
>>>
>>> Currently Editing TF is working on overhauling selection and editing,
>>> and defining selectability is a bit too hurry. CSS could define how
>>> selection looks, but as Ryosuke said, I think it's better for the
>>> selection and editing experts to define and CSS to refer to it.
>>
>> Right. If we can neither define how it looks nor how it behaves without
>> referring to specs that haven't been written yet, the benefits of
>> standardizing it now seem limited to me. Even if we get some high level
>> description in, we could not go very far when it comes to writing tests.
>>
>> I am still of the opinion we should put this in level 4, marking the interop
>> issues explicitly, and taking our time to solve them properly based on
>> Editing TF's work.
>
> Question to those who supported bringing this back into level 3 (Tab, and maybe Ted, and maybe someone else?):
>
> Given that CSS-UI level 3 is trying exit its long cycle of LC/CR, and given the interop issues surfaced by this thread, do you still think this is something that should go in level 3 (with sufficiently vague definitions to ignore the interop issues for now), or should it go to level 4 (which I plan to start as soon as level 3 hits CR) where we can try to work through the interop questions?
>
> I favor level 4.

Sure.

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 13 January 2015 21:52:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:51:56 UTC