This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
Again as the content attr and content element, while this is obviously impossible to confuse with select element, I think the word 'select' seems to be vague and less obvious explanation of the action it invokes. Perhaps 'use'? Also, is my assumption that the generic content without a 'select' attribute will render all content that has not previously rendered elsewhere with the 'select' attribute? I also wonder if it is necessary to have a 'select' attribute at all? Could we not use CSS region or any of the document flow agnostic layout features?
(In reply to comment #0) > Again as the content attr and content element, while this is obviously > impossible to confuse with select element, I think the word 'select' seems to > be vague and less obvious explanation of the action it invokes. > > Perhaps 'use'? I am pretty happy with "select", because it uses selector-based syntax. "Use" seems just a different color of the same bike shed :) > > Also, is my assumption that the generic content without a 'select' attribute > will render all content that has not previously rendered elsewhere with the > 'select' attribute? Yep. It says so in the example: <div> <content select="h1.cool"><!-- all h1.cool children will appear here --></content> <div class="cool"> <content select=".cool"><!-- all .cool children (except the ones that are h1.cool) appear here --></content> </div> <div class="stuff"> <content><!-- all remaining children will appear here --></content> </div> </div> > > I also wonder if it is necessary to have a 'select' attribute at all? Could we > not use CSS region or any of the document flow agnostic layout features? No, you really need a way to specify an insertion point in DOM. Once you've got an insertion point, you also need to have more than one, and then you need a way to differentiate between them.