- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 17:26:46 +0200
- To: "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 15:46:24 +0200, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: > Consider the following testcase: > > <!DOCTYPE html> > <form name="x"> > <img name="y"> > </form> > <script> > alert(document.forms["x"].y); > alert(document.forms["x"].elements.y); > </script> > > The results are as follows: > > IE9: alerts undefined twice (in both standards and quirks mode > as far as I can tell). > Opera 11: alerts [object HTMLImageElement], then undefined > Firefox: alerts [object HTMLImageElement], then undefined > Chrome: alerts [object HTMLImageElement] twice > Safari: alerts [object HTMLImageElement] twice > > Chrome and Safari are consistent with what the spec currently says for > the namegetter on HTMLFormElement, but not with the behavior specified > for form.elements. > > Opera and Firefox do what the spec currently says for form.elements, but > not for HTMLFormElement. > > IE currently does what the spec currently says. > > I'm pretty sure I've seen code in the past that switches on "IE vs > Netscape" and uses form.x for the latter while using getElementById for > the former, but that was a good long while ago. So I think we're > willing to risk the compat hit in Gecko of changing to the currently > specced behavior (which will incidentaly be simpler than what we do > now). Are Opera and WebKit willing to do that too? Or does the spec > need to change? > > -Boris Is this just for <img>? If Gecko changes and finds no compat problems then I'm sure Opera would change to match the spec too. If however you do find compat problems then that would be a good reason to change the spec. cheers -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Received on Friday, 15 April 2011 15:27:19 UTC