W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > October 2010

Re: getting rid of callers

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 05:46:57 +0000 (UTC)
To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1010130545250.8618@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Wed, 13 Oct 2010, Cameron McCormack wrote:
>
> Various HTML*Collection interfaces and the HTMLFormElement interface
> define callers.  Callers seem unpopular with many people, so I am
> wondering how many can actually be safely removed from the spec.
> 
> Here are some tests I ran to see where they’re implemented:
> 
>   http://people.mozilla.com/~cmccormack/tests/callers.html
>   http://people.mozilla.com/~cmccormack/tests/callers-quirks.html
> 
> The results are here:
> 
>   http://people.mozilla.com/~cmccormack/tests/callers-results.html
> 
> (I left out the HTMLPropertyCollection ones since nobody implements that
> yet.)
> 
> So of all the callers, Firefox has been getting away with only
> implementing document.all("blah"), and only for quirks mode.
> 
> For HTMLFormElement, it seems only IE implements them.  Are they really 
> necessary to have in the spec?

The real question is, is Microsoft willing to remove support for this 
feature? (in all modes, not just in some DOCTYPE-triggered ghetto)

If not, then the simplest way of getting interop would be for everyone to 
just implement these features. They're not that much of a burden, surely?

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 13 October 2010 05:47:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:15 GMT