W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: event.returnValue

From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 23:06:56 -0400
Message-ID: <4C9189D0.4090706@w3.org>
To: "Hallvord R. M. Steen" <hallvord@opera.com>
CC: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Olli Pettay <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>, www-dom@w3.org
Hi, Hallvord-

Hallvord R. M. Steen wrote (on 9/15/10 9:30 PM):
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 03:20:58 +0900, Olli Pettay
> <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi> wrote:
>
>>> However bz indicates there that returnValue doesn't make much sense
>>> outside of IEs event model. There were also *no* counter comments
>>> asking for reconsidering the bug resolution.
>
>> Yeah, I don't see reason to standardize returnValue.
>> We're not trying to specify all the old event handling related things.
>
> IMO one of our goals should be to close the gap between specs and
> reality / implementations. To do so, when we have non-standardised
> features we should either get them into a spec or drop them.

I understand this reasoning, but I don't think this has to necessarily 
be a reciprocal policy.  I think it's much more important that 
implementations have complete and bug-free support of common 
specifications, than that they not support features that aren't in those 
specs.

The reality is that there are some poorly-designed features that many 
browsers will have to support for legacy content, but where there are 
better-specified and more widely supported alternatives, I think it's 
counterproductive to also specify the non-standard feature.  For 
example, keyCode and charCode.


> Opera is *certainly* happy to stop supporting event.returnValue if
> WebKit will do so too ;). Should I report a WebKit bug on removing it?
> (Opera already has one).

I would expect that they support it for legacy content.  But I don't 
have a strong opinion about removing it or not.  I would hope that 
authors would use the standard methods going forward.


> Doug, you can probably close issue 132 since it seems there is a general
> agreement not to standardise event.returnValue :)

Okay, done.


> As for Garrett's helpful responses, I understand that we've had some
> controversies that means he is blocked from posting to the www-dom list
> (unfortunately, since the tecnical content of his contributions is often
> valuable though I can see why his style causes controversy.)
>
> I would rather not resume past flamewars, but I'd like the information
> he brought to my attention to be recorded in mailing list archives:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2010JulSep/thread.html#msg142
>
> How do I do that? Should I BCC him on replies rather than CC? (As a
> test, he's BCCed on this E-mail.)

I don't believe that he's blocked.  Did he send an email that didn't go 
through?  I can't see any in the queue.

Regards-
-Doug Schepers
W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs
Received on Thursday, 16 September 2010 03:07:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:14:05 GMT