Hi,
After reviewing the original specification for 'user-select: all' [1], I
think the behavior we had in mind for 'user-select: atomic' matches the
original intent of 'user-select: all'. It also partially matches the
Mozilla behavior, and I believe the differences are likely to be bugs in
Excellent! Thanks for the follow up. I'm so glad we reached out to the
standards group first.
- Ryosuke
On Aug 7, 2012 2:31 PM, Edward O'Connor eocon...@apple.com wrote:
Hi,
After reviewing the original specification for 'user-select: all' [1], I
think the behavior we had in mind for
We intend to work on an experimental implementation of a new
-webkit-user-select value that we are calling atomic. This value causes the
element to which it is applied to behave atomically for selection purposes;
either all of none of the element and its contents are contained in the
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Alice Cheng alice_ch...@apple.com wrote:
We intend to work on an experimental implementation of a new
-webkit-user-select value that we are calling atomic. This value causes
the element to which it is applied to behave atomically for selection
purposes; either
On Jul 23, 2012, at 3:39 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Alice Cheng alice_ch...@apple.com wrote:
We intend to work on an experimental implementation of a new
-webkit-user-select value that we are calling atomic. This value causes the
element to
Alice Cheng wrote:
Could you elaborate more on the difference? Maybe the difference is
small enough that it makes sense to reuse all. e.g. Mozilla might
be willing to change their behavior for all.
Mozilla is not selecting atomically using shift + right. It also does
not select atomically
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Brendan Eich bren...@mozilla.org wrote:
Alice Cheng wrote:
Could you elaborate more on the difference? Maybe the difference is small
enough that it makes sense to reuse all. e.g. Mozilla might be willing to
change their behavior for all.
Mozilla is not
7 matches
Mail list logo
