-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Should we ask about HTML features? #11
Comments
I would like to see either - but not simply removing them. I said "State of HTML & CSS" before, which would make it official (even though it probably doesn't ring as nice), but its own survey for HTML would be nice as well. Perhaps next year as, in addition to what we already could ask about today, there seems to be a good chunk of stuff (potentially) coming, which might be closely related to JS/other stuff, but still is HTML, e.g.:
|
I feel like a survey just for HTML might be too niche and not generate as much interest? But who knows, if HTML does start introducing new features at a faster pace like @Schweinepriester is suggesting then maybe I'm wrong? |
I agree that asking about tabindex and aria-attributes seem a bit out of place in this context. While important for accessibility, they aren't all that visual (unless used as selectors I guess). As for HTML features in general, I don't think a blanket "no HTML in a CSS survey" is the right way to go. I'd be interested to learn from the community how styling |
I'd say, if those HTML features tangent CSS, like the Though I agree with @Schweinepriester that just removing them without substitution would be bad. But maybe with all the discussions happening the Open UI group and HTML in general, there could be an HTML survey at some point. Sebastian |
@wkillerud Styling |
RESOLVED to remove:
|
The current survey asks about
tabindex
and ARIA. These don't seem to fit the general CSS theme, and seem a little out of place. Should we continue to include them?Relevant: would it make sense to have an HTML survey? (could ask about web components too)
(Split off from #2)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: