Re: <input type="date">: not marked at risk

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Masataka Yakura <myakura.web@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Silvia,
>
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Jukka K. Korpela
>> <jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
>> > 2013-09-23 4:52, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>> >>
>> >> FYI: being "at risk" has nothing to do with the usefulness of the
>> >> feature - the spec's concern is whether there is cross-UA support of
>> >> the feature.
>> >
>> >
>> > Which in turn depends on how useful the feature is seen by implementors,
>> > doesn't it?
>> > And on the amount of work needed for implementation, of course.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> Such a feature can be a useful feature (I personally have
>> >> used such input types in my recent apps), but its standardisation may
>> >> need to be delayed to the next version of HTML if UAs don't have
>> >> uniform support of the feature. That's all.
>> >
>> >
>> > According to
>> > https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/input
>> > the support status for type=date is the same as for type=datetime. So
>> > there
>> > must be
>> > something else than the current implementation status that explains why
>> > type=date
>> > is not marked as being at risk and type=datetime is not.
>>
>> It's simply a matter of process. At the time that the spec went into
>> Last Call, implementations were behind, so the feature was put "at
>> risk".
>
>
> So that means at that time, there was (or were) impl for the 'date' type but
> not other date&time-related types, right?

Correct.
Cheers,
Silvia.

Received on Wednesday, 25 September 2013 06:17:42 UTC