W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: [selectors-api] What DOM feature "Selectors API" belongs to?

From: Sergey Ilinsky <castonet@yahoo.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 17:44:08 +0200
Message-ID: <487B7448.8090408@yahoo.co.uk>
To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
CC: public-webapps@w3.org

Lachlan Hunt wrote:
> Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 03:40:44 +0200, Lachlan Hunt 
>> <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au> wrote:
>>> Would it be acceptable if I defined one, but made it optional for 
>>> implementers to support?  Or at least optional for ECMAScript 
>>> implementations?  That way an implementation can choose to support 
>>> it if feature detection is necessary for the language and there is 
>>> no other way to do it.
>> What's the point of making the feature string optional, exactly?
> To avoid forcing implementers to bother implementing such a useless 
> feature, and potentially lying about their support.  Basically, this 
> should only be for languages other than ECMAScript that don't have 
> other detection mechanisms available, and where the programmer isn't 
> always in control of which DOM implementation is in use where the 
> program is run.  (If the programmer is in control of that, then 
> feature detection is useless since they can just check the documentation)
Lachlan, shall the "Events" feature string be dropped from Events module 
then as well? The Events (Level-3) is now a working draft, so it could 
be a good moment of time to doing so!

In case it is not going to be dropped, then there is no sense to not 
including "Selectors" feature string in the "Selectors API" 
specification, given the fact that every other DOM module is required to 
provide one (correct me if I am wrong).

Also, could it be a good idea to contact great people who have set up 
the DOM-family specifications for use cases they had in mind with the 
DOM modules' "featuring" features.

Sergey Ilinsky/
Received on Monday, 14 July 2008 15:46:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:27 GMT