This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 8596 - terminology name collision: "Transparent" content models
Summary: terminology name collision: "Transparent" content models
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: HTML WG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: pre-LC1 HTML5 spec (editor: Ian Hickson) (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC Windows NT
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ian 'Hixie' Hickson
QA Contact: HTML WG Bugzilla archive list
URL: http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-01-03 19:07 UTC by Don Brutzman
Modified: 2010-10-04 14:46 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Description Don Brutzman 2010-01-03 19:07:27 UTC
3.2.5.2 Transparent content models

The use of "transparent" in this context is different than that used for rendering SVG or other objects.  For example in X3D, a scene's background color may be transparent in order to allow the HTML bgcolor to be shown.

Suggest considering another term for transparent (e.g. "replacable"
or "substitutable" or somesuch) in the context of this section
in order to avoid name collisions and reader confusion.
Comment 1 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2010-01-11 10:47:39 UTC
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
   http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html

Status: Rejected
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: I completely agree that "transparent" is suboptimal, but it's unfortunately less misleading than "replaceable" (which clashes with CSS terminology in an even more misleading way than "transparent") and "substitutable" (which as far as I can tell is just incorrect).

I'm open to other terms, but so far "transparent" has been the least problematic term suggested.