On 7/10/12 12:27 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
Since it doesn't for any other attributes that take a string but where
empty string and absence are different, why is it suddenly an issue
specifically with this attribute?
Because this is a new attribute we're defining and I happened to notice? ;)
I think the situation would be different if you were asking about changing
the behaviour of all content attributes rather than one specific one.
That's what Simon is arguing for here:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17283
I'm not sure that makes sense either, but it's more plausible, IMHO,
especially given that at least one UA apparently already does it. If Gecko
also changed in this manner it would make the decision a lot easier. :-)
Hmm. That might be doable, in fact. I'll shop it around.
-Boris
