simonp at opera.com
Tue Nov 8 23:13:48 PST 2011
On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 07:59:43 +0100, Simon Pieters <simonp at opera.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Nov 2011 20:07:04 +0100, Ojan Vafai <ojan at chromium.org> wrote:
>> We keep running into the use case where the physical position matters
>> the tab order. The problem with just setting tabIndex (or CSS3
>> is that it takes the thing out of the natural order.
>> This problem comes up in a lot of places (e.g. absolute positioning).
>> recently come up for CSS flexboxes, e.g. if you set flex-order or a
>> flow, then the tabindex still being in document order is often not what
>> author wants (https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62664).
>> <button tabindex=0>A</button>
>> <div tabindex=2 tabindexscope>
>> <button tabindex=2>C</button>
>> <button tabindex=1>B</button>
>> <button tabindex=1>D</button>
>> The order for the tabbing would be A-D-B-C.
> In legacy UAs the div would also be in the tab order. Maybe it's better
> to drop tabindex=2 and use tabindexscope=2 instead (default to 0 if
...which was also proposed in 2006:
More information about the whatwg