- From: Olli Pettay <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>
- Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 23:05:26 +0300
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- CC: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, www-dom@w3.org
On 9/20/09 1:29 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 11:04:43 +0200, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote: >> Anne van Kesteren wrote (on 9/20/09 4:39 AM): >>> FWIW, I do find it somewhat confusing. I'm mostly familiar with this >>> term due to HTML4 and there the end result was that UAs had to implement >>> the deprecated features. This might not be the meaning HTML4 gave to it, >>> I wouldn't know, but that is what it effectively meant. >> >> I suspect that was more of a market decision by browsers than a matter >> of specification conformance. > > Regardless, due to the HTML4 Transitional profile that is how many > authors perceive it too. I just checked HTML4 and it says this about > deprecated: "User agents should continue to support deprecated elements > for reasons of backward compatibility." That does not seem to match what > you want. > > The keyword here is "continue". If UA already implements some feature, it should continue to support it. But UA doesn't need to *add* support for a deprecated feature. That is at least how I read the word "deprecated" in DOM 3 Events. -Olli
Received on Sunday, 20 September 2009 20:06:11 UTC