Re: typeof document.all

On Oct 13, 2009, at 5:30 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Oct 2009, Brendan Eich wrote:
>> Thinking this through, I have two general approaches for  
>> alternative 3
>> in mind, hope it's ok to throw them out quickly:
>> (3a) underspecify document.all as a host object property that may be
>> reliably tested only by if, &&, ||, == null, == undefined, and !  
>> and the
>> != counterparts. Anything else is unspecified behavior.
> Personally I would be against underspecifying anything that can be
> black-box tested from a Web page.

This is silly. Is everything else in HTML5 full specified in terms of  
effects in the DOM, global objects, information leaks including  
implicit flows, and anything else "that can be black-box tested"?

I doubt it!

BTW, are you amenable to confining document.all to quirks mode?


Received on Wednesday, 14 October 2009 00:38:48 UTC