W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > October 2009

Re: Property enumeration on forms

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:09:55 -0700
Message-ID: <63df84f0910231709x7b23c563jaf5849e34df59ff@mail.gmail.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-script-coord@w3.org, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Oct 23, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't really feel strongly on the subject, however it appears that
>> most people on the public-script-coord felt that catch-alls were a
>> really bad idea and not something to be furthered. And you could argue
>> that adding enumerability to the catch-alls is furthering them.
>
> Although I think there is not the same degree of concern about array-like
> index accessors (indeed many conceded that it was a good pattern).

Indeed.

>> And since it appears that UAs are far from consistent, it's likely not
>> that much content out there that depend on the enumerability of
>> catch-alls.
>
> For catch-all getters and index getters on HTMLFormElement that may be true.
> But I suspect people do depend on enumeration for HTMLCollections and
> NodeLists. Though I'm not really sure what behavior they would depend on.
>
> What would your recommendation for form element be - that neither index nor
> named properties should be enumerable? Only index properties enumerable?

My recommendation is that only index properties are enumerable.

My initial email was intended just to speak for named catch-alls, not
in reference to index getter/setters at all.

/ Jonas
Received on Saturday, 24 October 2009 00:10:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:50 GMT