Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype)

Lachlan Hunt wrote:
> In other words, once IE ships with support for <html bugmode="IEn"> (or 
> whatever syntax), *all future standards compliant pages* will be 
> *unconditionally required* to use that switch and keep it updated forever!
> That cannot be considered, in any way whatsoever, an interim solution. 
> It is a *permanent* solution that we do not want.

   I just want to note that the way you are using |bugmode| is not as I
defined it. I realize you probably were aware of that, but I wanted to
make it clear to people who might be just coming in on the conversation,
especially since Chris Wilson never endorsed |bugmode| in any form, let
alone the way it's being used above.

   To clarify for the readers, I defined |bugmode| as being an explicit
opt-out of standards mode, with the mode you are opting into being the
value of the attribute. Thus you the default is standards mode when it's
omitted, and when it's defined the mode is always explicitly stated.

>> thus it shouldn't be part of the specification.
> Actually, in the above scenario, it would have to become part of the 
> spec simply because authors will be required to use it, despite it being 
> a UA-specific opt-in that the spec really shouldn't support.
> This is why I am pushing so hard for the default to be always-standards 
> mode.  It absolutely must be the default so that this really can be an 
> interim solution for IE, not a permanent solution for everyone.

   I agree completely. I should be able to write something that is
standards-compliant and have it render in a way that is
standards-compliant for all time. To do otherwise is to create extra
work for people who try to comply with standards.

Received on Friday, 20 April 2007 11:31:43 UTC