On Mar 1, 2008, at 4:05 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
This sounds like a good idea to me.
First off 'irrelevant' is pretty hard to spell for non-native
english speakers (go sweden!).
Second, the elements are in fact relevant to the page since in all
likelihood they will be used later. 'ignore' feels like a better
description since it's weaker. We want to acknowledges the existance
of the element, but tells you to not pay attention to it.
Though I might be making making the last part up given that I fall
into the first category :)
I like ignore and omit as options. irrelevant is indeed awkward to
spell.
- Maciej
/ Jonas
Nicholas C. Zakas wrote:
From this thread, it seems like the true purpose of irrelevant is
to add to HTML the logical equivalent of display:none in CSS. If
that is true, then I'd agree with Jeff that renaming the attribute
"ignore" or "omit" is a good idea. Can anyone either confirm or
deny the purpose of this attribute as the following description:
"This attribute is used to indicate part of a document whose
content is not considered primary to the page. In visual UAs,
elements with this attribute are not rendered; in non-visual UAs,
elements with this attribute are not read as part of the normal
content flow."
Thoughts?
-Nicholas
----- Original Message ----
From: Jeff Walden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Nicholas C. Zakas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: James Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [email protected]
Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 11:41:41 AM
Subject: Re: [whatwg] @Irrelevant [was: Re: Thoughts on HTML 5]
Nicholas C. Zakas wrote:
> If the true purpose of the irrelevant attribute is to aid in
> accessibility, then I think the name is completely wrong. The term
> "irrelevant" is confusing because, as I stated before, why would
anyone
> include content in a page that is irrelevant? What you really
need is a
> way to say "this is relevant only for non-visual UA's". Perhaps a
better
> attribute name would be "nonvisual"?
Unnecessarily suggests a particular medium of display; I suggest
the shorter alternatives ignore(d) or omit(ted) if you really want
the functionality.
The biggest problem with the attribute is the spec doesn't
sufficiently clearly describe the motivation for it; I suggest
mentioning the preloading of iframes as such an example (they don't
load/render if they're display:none, so it's either
visibility:hidden (?) or launching the element into outer space
offscreen with position/top/left), perhaps in an informative
paragraph.
Jeff
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
Search. <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
>
