W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2011

RE: RFC from implementers on Element.innerText

From: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2011 18:56:25 +0000
To: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <104E6B5B6535E849970CDFBB1C5216EB434F66EC@TK5EX14MBXC136.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
On Thursday, July 07, 2011 11:38 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> So at this point I'd like feedback from all the major browser
> implementers on what they want to do here.  I see three basic options:
> 
> 1) Browsers drop innerText support entirely, like Gecko now.
> 
> 2) Spec innerText to be like textContent but with whatever the bare
> minimum of differences are to be web-compatible, like Opera now.
> Authors who want to convert nodes to plaintext will have to use
> Selection.toString(), which will either remain unspecified or be
> specified separately.
> 
> 3) Spec innerText to be some sort of complicated pretty-printing
> mechanism, as compatible as possible with how browsers currently work.
>  The same algorithm could then optionally be reused for
> Selection.toString().

> Can I get official or semi-official positions from the four major
> browser engines on which of the three options are
> preferred/acceptable/unacceptable to them?  I don't know if there's
> anything we can do that everyone will agree on, but we should get as
> much agreement as possible.

I don't think we would do option #1. Unless there is a conflict, we typically
keep legacy functionality since it helps our developers move to the latest
document modes without requiring extra (essentially unnecessary) work.

We don't have a preference right now between 2 and 3. This doesn't seem like
an urgent issue and we'll consider whatever doesn't break the web.

Cheers,

Adrian.
Received on Thursday, 7 July 2011 18:56:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:36 GMT