- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 15:55:52 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23589 Paul Cotton <pcotton@microsoft.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pcotton@microsoft.com --- Comment #5 from Paul Cotton <pcotton@microsoft.com> --- (In reply to Anthony from comment #0) > <output> > > First an foremost. Not implemented? Maybe not sexy. Maybe not part of a > web app that gives it street cred yet. It's wallflower demeanor keep it off > even the comprehensive lists like: > > http://caniuse.com/#search=output > > But not implemented. Check again: > > http://html5test.com/compare/feature/form-output-element.html > > I've never been good at counting and whatnot, but it looks like this > friendly, simple to understand, "hey why not, it'll boost our score" element > is implemented by the current and most recent release of every major browser > and even most gaming consoles. Please remember that items were marked at risk by the HTML WG NOT only because the WG members thought they might need further implementations but ALSO because someone might have been concerned about the interoperability of the implementations of the feature. For example, is there any evidence that the implementations you pointed to for <output> actually follow the HTML 5 CR spec, and give the same results? Note that the current document that summarizes the CR exit criteria for HTML5 lists <output> as needing testing. http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tests-cr-exit.html So in summary I believe that <output> will remain on the "features at risk" list until the HTML WG has concrete testing proof of at least two independent and interoperable implementations. /paulc HTML WG co-chair PS: I have not yet had time to double check the current HTML5 testsuite to determine if <output> tests have been added since the CR exit criteria was drafted in June. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 22 October 2013 15:55:56 UTC