W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > October 2010

Re: getting rid of callers

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 22:47:43 -0700
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-id: <91F1B495-6FD5-4D2F-BFEC-AB14431BF857@apple.com>
To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>

On Oct 12, 2010, at 9:14 PM, Cameron McCormack wrote:

> Various HTML*Collection interfaces and the HTMLFormElement interface
> define callers.  Callers seem unpopular with many people, so I am
> wondering how many can actually be safely removed from the spec.
> Here are some tests I ran to see where they’re implemented:
>  http://people.mozilla.com/~cmccormack/tests/callers.html
>  http://people.mozilla.com/~cmccormack/tests/callers-quirks.html
> The results are here:
>  http://people.mozilla.com/~cmccormack/tests/callers-results.html
> (I left out the HTMLPropertyCollection ones since nobody implements that
> yet.)
> So of all the callers, Firefox has been getting away with only
> implementing document.all("blah"), and only for quirks mode.
> For HTMLFormElement, it seems only IE implements them.  Are they really
> necessary to have in the spec?
> I don’t have any data on any of this.  Does anyone else?  Any browser
> vendors willing to drop any of these callers? :)

From your results, it seems like Firefox is the odd man out. I think the case against would have to be pretty compelling for every other browser to change to match Firefox.

I realize some people find custom call behavior distasteful, but it's not really clear to me what the practical problem is with it.

Also, I find quirks-mode-only DOM behaviors more distasteful than custom call behavior, so if document.all needs it at all, I'd rather do it everywhere than limit to quirks mode.

I do agree that it would be better not to propagate custom call behavior to objects that didn't have it before. I don't think there is much need for HTMLPropertyCollection to be an HTMLCollection.

Received on Wednesday, 13 October 2010 05:48:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:05 UTC