[whatwg] Browser inconsistencies in rendering <optgroup> and <option>
bzbarsky at MIT.EDU
Mon May 2 16:59:45 PDT 2011
On 5/2/11 7:26 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> That makes sense, though I think it'd be better for that to be a style
> scoped to the binding that defines the<select>, personally.
OK, but more on this below.
>> I would clearly prefer that the behavior be defined in terms of CSS; UAs
>> that under the hood want to ignore the styles and just do something
>> magic can still do that, of course.
> The behaviour is defined in terms of CSS and a hypothetical binding
> language similar to XBL; in theory that should be sufficient for your
> needs, no?
I don't think so; we need to define at least some details of the
binding. That's what I meant by sites depending on the details. For
example, width calculations for <select> need to work in a particular
way (or rather small range of ways)....
> If not, I guess we have to work out what we can get browser vendors to
> converge on. I am concerned that this might not end up being exactly what
> you need, though, which would be of no more help to you than the status
> quo, but with more complicated rules.
That's entirely possible, yes. At the moment we're getting bug reports
because people write their HTML+CSS, test in only WebKit or only IE, and
then it breaks in Gecko. I would assume that there are others who only
test in Gecko and then it breaks in other browsers....
More information about the whatwg