- From: Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.org>
- Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 11:26:50 -0700
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, public-script-coord@w3.org
On Oct 8, 2009, at 10:43 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > At first glance, I'm not keen on the idea of making DOM API behavior > depend on ES5 strict mode. Strict and non-strict code can mix > freely, so to do the mode switching you have to know what kind of > code is calling you - that seems yucky to implement and goes beyond > the intent of strict mode that nearly all of its effects can happen > at compile time. For our "detecting context" that makes document.all not appear to be present when tested by if, ?:, &&, etc., as opposed to your always- present but falsy object, compile-time is the right time. Just noting this difference. > Also, affecting DOM APIs seems like major scope creep for strict > mode. Right now, WebKit's DOM APIs have no idea what kind of code is > calling them and I don't relish adding that functionality. Ok, good feedback. Thanks. > By contrast, document-level quirks mode vs. standards mode is a > single global switch for the whole document. So it's much easier to > implement the switching and verify that its correct. If we need to > have switchable DOM API behavior, I'd rather base it on HTML > standards vs. quirks rather than ES strict vs. non-strict. Are you open to making undetected-document.all emulation depend on an HTML standards vs. quirks mode switch? Probably we should move now to public-html, if there is no WebIDL angle to any of this. /be
Received on Thursday, 8 October 2009 18:29:14 UTC