- From: Travis Leithead <Travis.Leithead@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 21:30:32 -0800
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Wow. I thought that insertAdjecentHTML was ready for deprecation. >> There's also the argument that if outerHTML/insertAdjecentHTML is >> popular enough that we're adding them to HTML [...] Is this purely conjecture, or is there any data to back this up? -----Original Message----- From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ian Hickson Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 9:23 PM To: Jonas Sicking Cc: public-html@w3.org Subject: Re: outerHTML/insertAdjecentHTML in XML mode On Fri, 19 Dec 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote: > > Is there a reason to not allow outerHTML and insertAdjecentHTML in XML > serialized HTML documents? > > It seems to me like the cost of supporting them is minimal given that > almost all (if not all) the code will exist since innerHTML is supported > anyway. And it's nice to be consistent across XML and HTML modes. > > There's also the argument that if outerHTML/insertAdjecentHTML is > popular enough that we're adding them to HTML, why would they be less > popular in XML serialized documents? I've added them (though not document.write()), along with a big reorg of the way HTML5 works with XML. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 29 January 2009 05:32:37 UTC