W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > August 2010

[Bug 10068] Suggest making noscript obsolete but conforming

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 05:42:31 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1OnmHH-0008Ky-I7@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10068





--- Comment #56 from Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>  2010-08-24 05:42:30 ---
(In reply to comment #44)
> ...
> I wasn't making a value judgement.  Those are real-world examples (from
> Facebook) of authors using <noscript> to solve problems that they have no other
> way of solving.  Claiming something is obsolete or deprecated without giving
> authors better tools for solving their problems is waste of time.
> ...

Hey. Can we quote you on that in other threads? 

> ...
> >  <noscript><meta http-equiv="X-Frame-Options" content="deny"/></noscript>
> > 
> >  "X-Frame-Options" is an invalid "http-equiv" value in the current editor's
> > draft:
> 
> So?
> ...

(Advocatus Diaboli) Why does it matter when <noscript> gets deprecated when the
whole construct was non-conforming (because of X-Frame-Options) anyway?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 24 August 2010 05:42:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:21 UTC