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

Re: event.returnValue

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 09:01:49 +0200
To: "Hallvord R. M. Steen" <hallvord@opera.com>, "Doug Schepers" <schepers@w3.org>
Cc: "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "Olli Pettay" <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>, www-dom@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.vi35tbde64w2qv@anne-van-kesterens-macbook-pro.local>
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 05:06:56 +0200, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:
> 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.

I don't agree with this sentiment. If a feature (however pointless) is  
needed to get traction as a new web browser it should be defined so that  
the new browser does not have to reverse engineer other browsers. The more  
legacy features (that need to be implemented) we leave undocumented the  
bigger the barrier to entry. Which ultimately is just bad for the  
ecosystem.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Thursday, 16 September 2010 07:02:25 GMT

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