<A1C557E4755F4E5EA2762CBA3BA1FEF7@JukanPC>
Current votes: None.
Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Jukka K. Korpela > <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> wrote: >> Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> >>> <details> is definitely something we want to make fully >>> author-stylable. >> >> I donât. Whoâs this âweâ you are talking about, and why do they want >> to make <details> author-stylable even before a single browser has >> _any_ support to the element, at the functional level? > > "We" being, I suspect, the browser community. Thank you for the clarification. I would prefer seeing _one_ decent implementatiom of <details> before considering any fine tuning. > If that's overreaching, > then I'm content to say that *I* want it to be fully author-stylable, The primary question, as I see it, is to get decent implementations in the first place. I donât see crowds of authors yelling for author-stylability. >> Does it? Why do you imply the visual concept of a âdisclosure >> triangleâ, and how does that relate to the behavior proposed for >> â::markerâ in some draft? > > I don't understand the question. Why does <details> need to have any âdisclosure triangleâ? > However, the default visual behavior > of <details> is suggested in the HTML spec. You misspelled âthe current HTML(5) draft/sketchâ. And I would not take it as more than a suggestion in a work in progress, which is what it really is. >> I know that many CSS property names are misleading. But >> list-style-type, as defined in published CSS recommendations, isnât >> bound to any â::markerâ. > > It certainly is, in the Lists spec. Please cite the recommendation by its official name and/or URL.