On Dec 6, 2005, at 2:39 AM, Ray Whitmer wrote: > You should explain how this would occur, using the preferences the > way I described them in a previous message: > > (from my previous message on the topic) >> Example of radio buttons: >> >> (1) * IE (default for almost users, let's label it as it is, IE) >> (2) * Standards (claim 100% compliance if only the content were, not >> used unless IE-incompatible content is found) >> (3) * IE Standards Subset (non-treacherous for use by web authors so >> they produce content that is both IE and standards compliant) >> >> Users use the mode (1) if IE compatible, non-standards-compliant is >> the rule and they never need anything else. >> >> Web authors use mode (3) to test, which is designed to yield content >> that always works under mode (1) while being standards compliant. >> >> Mode (2) is only needed by test suites or content that is otherwise >> broken in IE. If there is content that needs it, you otherwise had >> no way to process it so having to flip a UI seems marginally better >> than nothing. Not a great solution, but in several ways superior to >> the status quo. > (end of self quote) > > How does this mode for web authors produce code that "might break > in almost all browsers"? Mode 3 was proposed as an option that > produces code that should work in almost all browsers while also > complying with standards. Only if it is not correctly implemented > would it produce code that "might break in almost all browsers". > Please explain. The problem is that your mode (3) is impossible. getAttribute can return either empty string or null. How could you have a mode where it complies with the standard by returning empty string, yet ensures that the JS code will still work in a browser that returns null? Proving that reduces to solving the halting problem. Regards, MaciejReceived on Tuesday, 6 December 2005 19:16:44 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:24:58 GMT