Re: [whatwg] details members
On Mon, 6 Aug 2007, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Sat, 04 Aug 2007 08:40:08 +0200, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know. Currently, the only elements that use defaultFoo are option with defaultSelected, input with defaultValue and defaultChecked, and textarea and output with defaultValue. Given that only the first three map to attributes (the last two map to textContent), and that in all five cases the defaultness is directly related to the fact that they can be reset using .reset() and reset buttons, I'm not convinced that there really is a strong precedent here. The details element's open attribute is quite a different beast, IMHO. Could you elaborate on how this could be confusing? I'm not sure I really understand why authors would have problems with this. It's mostly that it makes sense to me to have the initial state available somehow without having to keep track of it as an author. I can't really think of any use cases at the moment though. The only parts of the platform that remember their initial state that I can think of are those that can be reset using input type=reset, so I'm going to leave this one unaddressed. If there are particular use cases that come up, please let me know. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Re: [whatwg] details members
On Sat, 04 Aug 2007 08:40:08 +0200, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know. Currently, the only elements that use defaultFoo are option with defaultSelected, input with defaultValue and defaultChecked, and textarea and output with defaultValue. Given that only the first three map to attributes (the last two map to textContent), and that in all five cases the defaultness is directly related to the fact that they can be reset using .reset() and reset buttons, I'm not convinced that there really is a strong precedent here. The details element's open attribute is quite a different beast, IMHO. Could you elaborate on how this could be confusing? I'm not sure I really understand why authors would have problems with this. It's mostly that it makes sense to me to have the initial state available somehow without having to keep track of it as an author. I can't really think of any use cases at the moment though. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/ http://www.opera.com/
Re: [whatwg] details members
On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 21:01:14 +0100, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it would be more consistent to have .defaultOpen besides .open to reflect the content attribute. .open would then reflect the current state. Consistent with form controls, that is. I intentionally broke consistency here to avoid the mess that the .defaultFoo stuff has caused over the years. Do you disagree with this decision? Yeah. The .defaultFoo stuff has set the standard. I think it might be confusing if we move away from that for new elements. I don't know. Currently, the only elements that use defaultFoo are option with defaultSelected, input with defaultValue and defaultChecked, and textarea and output with defaultValue. Given that only the first three map to attributes (the last two map to textContent), and that in all five cases the defaultness is directly related to the fact that they can be reset using .reset() and reset buttons, I'm not convinced that there really is a strong precedent here. The details element's open attribute is quite a different beast, IMHO. Could you elaborate on how this could be confusing? I'm not sure I really understand why authors would have problems with this. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Re: [whatwg] details members
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007, Anne van Kesteren wrote: I think it would be more consistent to have .defaultOpen besides .open to reflect the content attribute. .open would then reflect the current state. Consistent with form controls, that is. I intentionally broke consistency here to avoid the mess that the .defaultFoo stuff has caused over the years. Do you disagree with this decision? -- Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Re: [whatwg] details members
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 21:01:14 +0100, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it would be more consistent to have .defaultOpen besides .open to reflect the content attribute. .open would then reflect the current state. Consistent with form controls, that is. I intentionally broke consistency here to avoid the mess that the .defaultFoo stuff has caused over the years. Do you disagree with this decision? Yeah. The .defaultFoo stuff has set the standard. I think it might be confusing if we move away from that for new elements. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/ http://www.opera.com/
