I remember when was considered something like IE's answer to the tag. I'd like to see an article about the origin of the tag, much like that one about the origin of the tag[0] that you see going around now and then.
Marquee HTML Element
21–30 of 30 posts
Re: Marquee HTML Element
#22Re: Marquee HTML Element
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a consistent and reasoned argument, and also the one advanced at the turn of the century to deprecate . I'd have agreed with you, had the standard kept this approach. But it's obviously not the direction the committees are going for, not anymore. It seems we're going to add more and more presentational elements. I can't think of single argument for including that doesn't apply at least as well for (and the sam…
Toasts have common semantics: they are responses to user behavior, they are ephemeral, and they take precedence over the underlying content. Marquees have no semantics beyond "more text than fits in this space".
So toasts have a positive z-index, and the display attribute changes to none after a short while? That's awfully presentational, just as much as marquee.
Note that the github defining does not use your 'response to user behaviour' definition. It says rather: "a non modal, unobtrusive window element used to display brief, auto-expiring windows of information to a user". It could be just about any information according to this definition. That's not very semantic - all what this definition refers to is presentational.
Or if we take the other (more verbose) definition: "is a small message that shows up in a box at the bottom of the screen and disappears on its own after few seconds. It is a simple feedback about an operation in which current activity remains visible and interactive".
Yes, the latter definition uses the word "feedback" in the second sentence - but nothing there says that feedback is only in response to a user initiated operation. It could just as well have been a message about some system thingy. They key part is presentational again ("small message", "box at the bottom of the screen", "disappears after a few seconds").
Re: Marquee HTML Element
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
marquee is a presentational HTML element and for that reason should probably still be forever-deprecated, but CSS should be improved to provide equivalent functionality. I think CSS animations can maybe do something similar but it's not as easy as it should be…
That's a consistent and reasoned argument, and also the one advanced at the turn of the century to deprecate . I'd have agreed with you, had the standard kept this approach. But it's obviously not the direction the committees are going for, not anymore. It seems we're going to add more and more presentational elements. I can't think of single argument for including that doesn't apply at least as well for (and the sam…
> I can't think of single argument for including that doesn't apply at least as well for (and the same criticism should have applied to too).
People browse the Internet on phones, where toasts require complex and evolving presentation and marquees do not.
You're comparing apples to oranges, marquees v. toasts. A toast is more like an audio or video tag on a mobile device. was an example another commenter gave but missed the point completely: modals and dialogs are nuts on mobile devices!
It's about browsers taking more ownership of presentation on devices people actually use.
Re: Marquee HTML Element
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
Toasts have common semantics: they are responses to user behavior, they are ephemeral, and they take precedence over the underlying content. Marquees have no semantics beyond "more text than fits in this space".
So toasts have a positive z-index, and the display attribute changes to none after a short while? That's awfully presentational, just as much as marquee. Note that the github defining does not use your 'response to user behaviour' definition. It says rather: "a non modal, unobtrusive window element used to display brief, auto-expiring windows of information to a user". It could be just about any information according…
Should I have prefaced my own definition with "imo"? I believe that there is a common semantic core that could be encapsulated in a new element. The closest thing to a presentational demand I would include is that they be temporary.
Re: Marquee HTML Element
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a consistent and reasoned argument, and also the one advanced at the turn of the century to deprecate . I'd have agreed with you, had the standard kept this approach. But it's obviously not the direction the committees are going for, not anymore. It seems we're going to add more and more presentational elements. I can't think of single argument for including that doesn't apply at least as well for (and the sam…
> I can't think of single argument for including that doesn't apply at least as well for (and the same criticism should have applied to too). People browse the Internet on phones, where toasts require complex and evolving presentation and marquees do not. You're comparing apples to oranges, marquees v. toasts. A toast is more like an audio or video tag on a mobile device. was an example another commenter gave but mis…
According to the github page, we do not get to use some system support thingy where the browser takes the toast and displays it elsewhere. The webdesigner still needs to roughly indicate where it's displayed in the page (the choices range from 'top-left' to 'bottom-right').
Unless there's something I've missed, I don't see how that's too different than adroit use of 'position', 'left' etc.
Re: Marquee HTML Element
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
So toasts have a positive z-index, and the display attribute changes to none after a short while? That's awfully presentational, just as much as marquee. Note that the github defining does not use your 'response to user behaviour' definition. It says rather: "a non modal, unobtrusive window element used to display brief, auto-expiring windows of information to a user". It could be just about any information according…
Should I have prefaced my own definition with "imo"? I believe that there is a common semantic core that could be encapsulated in a new element. The closest thing to a presentational demand I would include is that they be temporary.
I did not mean to be overly argumentative. I just wanted to refer to the proposal as it is. There could be a case for a somewhat different proposal like yours, say if mobile does need this and implements support. However, at the moment the proposed element is defined almost entirely by presentational demands.
Re: Marquee HTML Element
#28Used just a couple weeks ago to simulate a scrolling text screensaver for use as a video backdrop. Actually used the linked page as a reference and laughed a bit at the "truespeed" attribute.
I use it when testing for XSS. It shows me where the dirty text is being added to the page and it can be very amusing when nested.
That's an interesting use indeed, do you have any examples?
Re: Marquee HTML Element
#29I remember when was considered something like IE's answer to the tag. I'd like to see an article about the origin of the tag, much like that one about the origin of the tag[0] that you see going around now and then. [0] http://www.montulli.org/theoriginofthe%3Cblink%3Etag
Interestingly, it seems the blink tag is now totally unsupported in modern browsers, whereas marquee seems to generally work.
Re: Marquee HTML Element
#30DVD screensaver bounce using two marquee elements.
https://codepen.io/kfalencik/pen/bXYMbr