I'm inclined to agree with Mislav here. If data-* attributes are valid
without values, I see no reason to have different behavior for them.

On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 3:34 AM, Mislav Marohnić
<[email protected]>wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 17:26, Alex Kahn <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> > Do folks agree? Should true and false be expressed explicitly as
>> > values for HTML5 data-attributes?
>
>
> Well, I don't see why an element couldn't just be written like <img
> src="..." data-foo>.
>
> The presence of "data-foo" attribute means true, its absence means false.
> It's all about how you use these attributes—you define their semantics
> themselves depending on your needs.
>
> You don't gain much by forcing yourself to use "true" vs. "false" as
> values. This is how you would check for truth in both cases with JavaScript:
>
>     element.getAttribute('data-foo') != null
>     // with values:
>     element.getAttribute('data-foo') == "true"
>
> And in CSS:
>
>     img[data-foo]
>     /* with values: */
>     img[data-foo="true"]
>
> The only use-case for having attribute values is when you need to
> differentiate between 3 states: true, false, or nil (absence of the
> attribute). This is rare, and you can achieve it without the patch by
> casting boolean to string:
>
>     %img{ :data => { :foo => obj.predicate?.to_s } }
>
> So you see, we already have the ability to have "true" and "false" as
> values—your patch is only removing the ability to have attributes without
> values.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Haml" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected] <haml%[email protected]>.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Haml" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected].
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en.

Reply via email to