- From: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
- Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 10:49:53 +0900
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
> > On 25 Sep 2015, at 03:06, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 6:59 AM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote: >> This seems to make sense. It builds off the same internal model that the input modality pseudo used, and exposes it in a syntax that is more to the point when trying to address the primary (only?) use case: the focus ring. > > And, nicely, actually requires no new logic or state; the browser > already knows when it's showing a focus ring. Right. The spec should stay away from trying to define when the focus ring is shown, it should only hook into the browser's existing logic for that. >> The bit that confuses me a little is that you say "independently relevant". Do we still need the modality pseudo if we have this? > > That's what I'm discussing with Alice and Brian. I'm currently of the > opinion that, with the ability to customize how an element deals with > focus rings, and possible better default behavior in some cases, we > won't need anything further; they're currently thinking about > use-cases and other possibilities that will require more > functionality. I'd tend to agree that as long as we can deal with focus rings, we're covered. But it's worth exploring the other uses cases before we make a decision, because if there are more use cases, and :focus-ring would not be enough for them, I am not sure we want 2 different (but overlapping) mechanisms. - Florian
Received on Friday, 25 September 2015 01:50:27 UTC