On Sat, 15 Aug 2009, T.J. Crowder wrote: > > > > We've looked at doing this before, but it has a very poor backwards- > > compatibility story, unfortunately. > > Yes, again, I did make the point in my original post that using this > shorthand form would very much be a "caveat author" (author beware) > situation -- the effect in older UAs will not be as desired. Very much > like the new tags. I frankly wouldn't expect to get much use out of > this new shorthand form for a good 3-4 years while compliance comes up > -- but in 3-4 years, it would be quite nice to have, hence suggesting it > now. I think it would take a lot longer than 4 years, but in the meantime we'd have quite an unfortunate situation with respect to some browsers having very different results than others, etc. > > It wouldn't be that hard to parse, but it would only save you a 5 > > keystrokes... > > Which is to say, frequently, half the total. I think 50% gains are > worth pursuing. But even more so, the alignment with CSS syntax is very > attractive and natural. I think what would be helpful would be to make a JS library that fakes this (by searching for elements with attributes that start with "." and adding them to the class="" attribute), and seeing if it gets adoption. That would provide interesting information for future developers of HTML. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'Received on Tuesday, 25 August 2009 03:28:15 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:03:57 UTC