- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 00:21:44 +0000
- To: public-script-coord@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11451 --- Comment #25 from Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> 2011-12-21 00:21:43 UTC --- (In reply to comment #24) > One thing that worries me a little about this kind of feature detection is that > the existence of these properties (and it's just the same with consts) does not > necessarily mean that the values are accepted on any particular attribute or > operation. Yes, one must be aware of how the API works. That's true without such a listing, though. This doesn't change the way that anything is done, or provide new abilities, or anything like that. It just simplifies the check for whether something is supported or not. Rather than reading the value after setting it, or catching an exception, there's a property existence check. This check is used in the exact same way as the prior two types of checks, it's just easier to use. In other words, your worry is unrelated to my request itself, but rather concerns itself with the very nature of feature testing. -- Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 21 December 2011 00:21:52 UTC