- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 23:28:30 -0700
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, public-html@w3.org
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Oct 2010, 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?
>
> The real question is, is Microsoft willing to remove support for this
> feature? (in all modes, not just in some DOCTYPE-triggered ghetto)
>
> If not, then the simplest way of getting interop would be for everyone to
> just implement these features. They're not that much of a burden, surely?
This is clearly not the only qualification for if a feature should
stay. Or are you arguing we should add VML and vbscript to HTML5 as
well?
/ Jonas
Received on Wednesday, 13 October 2010 06:29:25 UTC