Re: ISSUE-41/ACTION-97 decentralized-extensibility

Philip Taylor wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote:
>> [...]
>> While not explicitly mentioned, I will make the assumption that future 
>> releases of IE will continue to support tagUrn.
> tagUrn needs to be considered alongside scopeName and 
> document.namespaces, since they are the other DOM parts of IE's 
> pseudo-namespace implementation.
> (I've updated to include 
> scopeName now.)


(Enhancement idea: annotate that with whether these are DOM L1, DOM L2, 
or proprietary).

> I can see four reasonable possibilities:
>  * IE continues to support tagUrn, scopeName and document.namespaces, 
> while all other browsers continue not to.
>  * IE removes support for tagUrn, scopeName and document.namespaces
>  * All other browsers add support for tagUrn, scopeName and 
> document.namespaces
>  * We try to forget all about this, and satisfy any relevant use cases 
> using syntax that doesn't require all this complexity and reverse 
> engineering and compatibility-risking changes of behaviour.
> The first option is bad for interoperability, because people will write 
> valid HTML5 code using the features and it will break in other browsers.
> ...

"Valid" only because the concept of validity in HTML5 does not extend to 
script content, right?

Anyway; I don't see a big issue here. People already can write valid 
HTML4 or HTML5 code that only works in IE. It just yet another way to do 
so. Validity checking is no substitute for testing, in particular when 
JS is needed.

BR, Julian

Received on Monday, 5 October 2009 12:40:41 UTC