8118 2009-10-28 19:18:18 +0000 Remove the Hidden Attribute 2010-10-04 14:49:40 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG pre-LC1 HTML5 spec (editor: Ian Hickson) unspecified Macintosh Mac System 9.x CLOSED WONTFIX a11y, NE, TrackerIssue, WGDecision P3 normal FPWD 1 shelleyp ian ian jonas joshue.oconnor laura.lee.carlson mike mjs public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking shelleyp public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 29182 0 shelleyp 2009-10-28 19:18:18 +0000 Remove section 7.1 which describes a hidden boolean attribute. The ability to hide or display elements is adequately covered with CSS, via both the visible and the display properties. The hidden attribute is completely redundant, and violates the standard of separating presentation from the contents. 30386 1 mjs 2010-01-04 14:44:43 +0000 The hidden attribute applies to things that are currently not relevant at a semantic, not just presentational level. In that respect it is similar to aria-hidden, but it has the obvious presentational effect in addition. 30392 2 shelleyp 2010-01-04 20:27:15 +0000 (In reply to comment #1) > The hidden attribute applies to things that are currently not relevant at a > semantic, not just presentational level. In that respect it is similar to > aria-hidden, but it has the obvious presentational effect in addition. > CSS can manage presentation, and aria-hidden can manage accessibility. The attribute is redundant. 30393 3 mjs 2010-01-04 20:36:25 +0000 (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > The hidden attribute applies to things that are currently not relevant at a > > semantic, not just presentational level. In that respect it is similar to > > aria-hidden, but it has the obvious presentational effect in addition. > > > > CSS can manage presentation, and aria-hidden can manage accessibility. The > attribute is redundant. > That's assuming semantics doesn't matter, and that saying two things is just as good as saying one thing. When a particular semantic, presentation and accessibility behavior all go together, it's useful to have a single construct to take care of all aspects. 30396 4 shelleyp 2010-01-04 21:06:57 +0000 (In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > (In reply to comment #1) > > > The hidden attribute applies to things that are currently not relevant at a > > > semantic, not just presentational level. In that respect it is similar to > > > aria-hidden, but it has the obvious presentational effect in addition. > > > > > > > CSS can manage presentation, and aria-hidden can manage accessibility. The > > attribute is redundant. > > > > That's assuming semantics doesn't matter, and that saying two things is just as > good as saying one thing. When a particular semantic, presentation and > accessibility behavior all go together, it's useful to have a single construct > to take care of all aspects. > There is nothing semantically relevant in the discussion for the hidden attribute. 30787 5 jonas 2010-01-08 20:16:42 +0000 This does not appear to be the case. The "The hidden attribute" section in the spec says: When specified on an element, it indicates that the element is not yet, or is no longer, relevant. Which seems to define a semantic meaning. 30795 6 ian 2010-01-09 00:03:41 +0000 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: Accepted Change Description: no spec change Rationale: The hidden="" attribute is no longer in the vocabulary spec, it's now only defined in the split-out spec with the user interaction stuff. 30796 7 shelleyp 2010-01-09 00:30:38 +0000 (In reply to comment #6) > 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: Accepted > Change Description: no spec change > Rationale: The hidden="" attribute is no longer in the vocabulary spec, it's > now only defined in the split-out spec with the user interaction stuff. > I checked the HTML 5 specification here at the W3C. Link http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-hidden-attribute. Are you saying this section is no longer part of the spec? 30812 8 ian 2010-01-09 11:28:23 +0000 (reopening since an unrelated change undid this one) 30815 9 shelleyp 2010-01-09 15:46:36 +0000 (In reply to comment #8) > (reopening since an unrelated change undid this one) > Is this open or closed? I asked that this item be removed. Such a removal does necessitate ripping apart HTML5. 30821 10 shelleyp 2010-01-09 21:23:20 +0000 (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > > (reopening since an unrelated change undid this one) > > > > Is this open or closed? > > I asked that this item be removed. Such a removal does necessitate ripping > apart HTML5. > Sorry, typo. Removing/deleting/discarding this attribute does _not_ necessitate ripping apart HTML5. 30887 11 ian 2010-01-11 10:10:50 +0000 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: hidden="" is a key part of HTML5's accessibility story and represents one of the main accessibility improvements over HTML4 for dynamic applications. 30926 12 shelleyp 2010-01-11 15:37:36 +0000 Created as Tracker Issue 95 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/95 30935 13 joshue.oconnor 2010-01-11 19:29:17 +0000 I am a little confused by this one. Firstly, Shelly's issue with @hidden seemed to be accepted and then rejected? I am still a little in the dark as to the usefulness of the attribute either way. FWIW I don't think it has a semantic meaning at all - but it /may/ have a certain useful that does strike me as being of a presentational nature - but again that would have to be demonstrated. I don't see how it is an improvement on HTML 4 and the @hidden seems to duplicate what can already be done with CSS. 31802 14 cooper 2010-02-11 17:26:26 +0000 Per the proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Jan/0245.html, the HTML A11Y TF does not plan to formally work on this issue at this time. This does not mean the TF has no interest in it, but does not have immediate plans to work on it. The TF may review the issue in the future. 37032 15 mjs 2010-07-21 02:06:26 +0000 The HTML WG has published a decision affirming the editor's resolution - the hidden attribute will not be removed.