W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2012

Re: Explicit feature manifesting for backward-compatibility safety (Was: Comment syntax)

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 17:33:11 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBZf7La=SMatRdHdLoZ3qdN_Mt5QWE_O+qKpN-N9O_+Pg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com" <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
Cc: "Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu" <kanghaol@oupeng.com>, Zachary “Gamer_Z.” Yaro <zmyaro@gmail.com>, Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>, WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>, "Jens O. Meiert" <jens@meiert.com>
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com
<mtanalin@yandex.ru> wrote:
> 28.08.2012, 03:27, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>:
>> "Big red switches" like this are an anti-pattern.  Occasionally they
>> can be useful, but they're hazardous and should be avoided if
>> possible.
>
> We already have this "anti-pattern" with DOCTYPE and with X-UA-Compatible. If language cannot be improved without such switches, this is fine pragmatic way to go that is much better than doing nothing.

Yup, DOCTYPE switching was a necessary solution to a very bad compat
problem.  The benefit outweighed the badness.  X-UA-Compatible is
similar (though note that it's not endorsed by any vendors other than
IE and Chrome Frame, I think, because the pain isn't worth it to
anyone else).

You have to justify the big red switch.  I don't think // comments
come *anywhere* near sufficient benefit to overcome the pain of a
switch.

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 28 August 2012 00:33:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:58 GMT