...

View Full Version : New properties for <a> in CSS3



mindlessLemming
02-26-2004, 01:40 PM
According to the Web Standards Project (WASP) (http://webstandards.org/buzz/archive/2004_02.html#000301) the CSS working group has been busy on new projects including two great CSS3 features:
1.The Hyperlink Presentation Module 1st Working Draft (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-css3-hyperlinks-20040224/) , which basically outlines a new <a> attribute,
target (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-css3-hyperlinks-20040224/#target0) .
2.The CSS "Reader" Media Type (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-css3-reader-20040224/) , which will allow us to specify a seperate rule set for screen-readers, braille output devices and other aural or bitmap output (?) devices.
:cool: Sweet:cool:
Being first working drafts they are still a fair way off being final recommendations, but I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
We all know which browser will support this stuff first, don't we ;)
So who's got something to say?


Andrew

me'
02-26-2004, 06:46 PM
a { target-new: tab }Hell yeah.

liorean
02-26-2004, 08:07 PM
Nice, but I see a problem here - there's no way to construct a user stylesheet that overrides just the style rules that specify target-name to be new or modal.

me'
02-26-2004, 10:21 PM
You can get halfway there:
* { target-new: tab !important }But that still lets modal dialogues through.

brothercake
02-26-2004, 10:22 PM
But if you go:


* { target-new: none !important }

Won't that just make those links do nothing at all?

I don't like it ... I thought we were getting rid of link targetting because it's considered a bad thing to do, not because its semantics are more akin to CSS than XHTML (which I don't agree with anyway - I don't think targetting is HTML semantics or presentation; it's interface control, which is a different thing entirely, and not something XHTML or CSS should address, imo).

I don't want websites to be able to open new tabs within my browser just as much as I don't want them to be able to open windows.

But at a pinch, Modular XHTML can still do targetting; so what is there to gain from this that can't be acheived in other ways, and without the accessibility question marks?

But I like the new media type - that could be helpful.

liorean
02-26-2004, 10:38 PM
Well, from what I understand they moved this to styles because it isn't semantics, and shouldn't really be present in the link semantics specifications. Also, they wanted a uniform method for doing it across XML applications without introducing either a new language or make too large changes in the old ones. They will probably change XLink to be more a link identification language, and let this spec control the presentation part (or at least the part that isn't semantics.).


Have a look at <http://www.w3.org/2003/01/16-tag-xlink>, <http://people.opera.com/howcome/2000/css3/clink-nov-6.html> and <http://www.w3.org/TR/hlink/>. For related proposals and the TAG discussions.

mindlessLemming
02-26-2004, 10:53 PM
Originally posted by brothercake

But I like the new media type - that could be helpful.
Damn straight :D

Mhtml
02-27-2004, 12:27 AM
Cool .. I can ditch a little js I use for targetting.

mindlessLemming
02-27-2004, 01:31 AM
Originally posted by Mhtml
Cool .. I can ditch a little js I use for targetting.
Yeah, in about 3-5 years when browser support catches up.
I must say though, adding this functionality to CSS took me by surpirse. I really didn't think it was within the presentation scope. But hey, what would I know, I've only been into this stuff for under a year....

liorean
02-27-2004, 02:28 AM
Actually the initial Clink proposal is four years old, and the similar markup based Hlink is a year and a half old. Both are trying to address this, which is essentially a failure in HTML/XHTML and XLink as they look today. I personally think CSS is a pretty good solution for this, especially since we have a standardised user overriding mechanism.

The only gripe I have with it is that you can't override CSS on a style rule base, only on a selector base.



As for the support, I woulld not be surprised if Opera started supporting this right away (they had a large part in it being proposed in the first instance), with Safari and Mozilla being two to four months behind. The other browsers are either irrelevant on the whole (e.g. IceBrowser), stagnant (e.g. iew), or discontinued (e.g. iem).





I don't think it's really in the presentation scope - it's just that it's not in any other scope related to the document. A ditched original suggestion was a separate CSS syntax based linking sheets language for just this. HLink is essentially also a linking sheets language, but XML based instead.

simulcrash
01-13-2005, 12:20 AM
{ target-new: tab !important }
what is or is there an HTML equivelent?
Simulcrash

Antoniohawk
01-13-2005, 12:26 AM
At the moment, there is no equivalent and that won't work until CSS3 becomes the new standard. The only choice that you have is finding an extension that will do what you want.

hemebond
01-13-2005, 01:35 AM
Oh man, this is shocking. All the attempts made to stop websites opening new windows or hijacking the users navigation, and they go and add this **** into the specification. Idiots.

It was probably Tantek Çelik (tantekc@microsoft.com) (he works for Microsoft).

Antoniohawk
01-13-2005, 03:01 AM
I'm glad, they need a good guy like him. Maybe he will whip IE into shape.

mindlessLemming
01-13-2005, 03:29 AM
It was probably Tantek Çelik (he works for Microsoft).
No he doesn't. He works for Technorati. He used to work for microsoft, and was responsible for IE mac's tasman engine; the most CSS capable rendering engine of its time.
Just 'cause someone's boss is evil don't mean squat.
If it did, I wouldn't work for Brady! :D ;)

Antoniohawk
01-13-2005, 03:36 AM
No he doesn't. He works for Technorati. He used to work for microsoft, and was responsible for IE mac's tasman engine; the most CSS capable rendering engine of its time.
Just 'cause someone's boss is evil don't mean squat.
If it did, I wouldn't work for Brady! :D ;)
LMAO! Good one Andrew. I'm kinda peeved that I stood up for Tantek for the wrong reason, but I accomplished what I wanted, I guess. Brady, if you're reading this, you still need to answer my pm, ya lazy San Franciscan... :D

hemebond
01-13-2005, 04:18 AM
No he doesn't. He works for Technorati. He used to work for microsoft, and was responsible for IE mac's tasman engine; the most CSS capable rendering engine of its time.I was just going by the email on the spec page.

brothercake
01-13-2005, 09:20 AM
It may have the most complete support for CSS3 selectors of any current browser, but it's a long way from that to calling it "the most CSS capable rendering engine of its time".

It's an appalling, unstable piece of crap ... has almost all the same bugs as Mac/IE5, plus quite a few new ones, but of course none of the old CSS hacks work anymore, so if you want to support it fully you wind up with endless negation rules just for MSN, hence the not-my-child hack (http://www.jasonkarldavis.com/articles/notmychild/)

I hate the damn thing, and I'm only grateful that virtually nobody uses it.

liorean
01-13-2005, 10:38 PM
It may have the most complete support for CSS3 selectors of any current browser, but it's a long way from that to calling it "the most CSS capable rendering engine of its time".
That's not fair... He was talking about iem, not msn/osx. And I would stand by naming it "the most CSS capable rendering engine of its time". Ie6w, nn6-7, moz, op5-8 are all later browsers. Compared to Ie5w, nn4 and the early Opera versions Ie5m was clearly superior at CSS. In fact, it was so good that it remained one of the best till the days of moz0.9.x, ie6w and op6 - the introduction of production quality, less buggy, more stable and more standards compliant browsers. And of those, ie6w is at most level with, but not superior to, ie5m.

brothercake
01-14-2005, 01:00 AM
Oh I thought he was talking about MSN ...

But I still don't really agree - capability is no use without stability, and mac/ie is (has always been) unstable as hell.

liorean
01-14-2005, 02:57 AM
Considering that it's main competitor was nn4, and that browser was both even less stable and had only minimal CSS support, I'd say it wasn't at all bad at the time. The only less stable browser I've found is nn6.0, which wasn't the marvel at CSS that the more mature moz versions have become.

bradyj
01-14-2005, 04:52 AM
LMAO! Good one Andrew. I'm kinda peeved that I stood up for Tantek for the wrong reason, but I accomplished what I wanted, I guess. Brady, if you're reading this, you still need to answer my pm, ya lazy San Franciscan... :D

I will, I'm lazy, I know:) it's business tax month, bear with me.
And I am evil, don't forget it Andrew:)

As far as the tab attribute -- while the thought of using it excites me -- and it's something I've wanted to be able to do for some time - I do feel it goes against my hard accepted (brothercake beat it in to me a long time ago on this forum) that I shouldn't be messing with users software in any way. Much less, I can damn well see that getting as annoying as pop up windows -- and I'll just end up having to get the latest safari 'block new tab windows' and firefox extension to do the same.

As cool as it sounds, it's still the same principle -- and it will be abused by many before we abandon it again.

The CSS reader styling and the like is very useful though, and I welcome it.

As for Mac IE -- I think it broke new ground when it came out. But like other projects, it was just left stale and dead too long. It's time passed quickly, but it was a good first step. Regardless, I don't even test in it anymore, so I could care now. It's not worth wasting the hack time for old mac users.



EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum