Re: Browsers and ECMAscript editions

On Wednesday, August 11, 2010, 9:51:12 AM, Robin wrote:

RB> On Aug 9, 2010, at 23:53 , Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
>> Interesting, since E4X is used in a number of non-browser JavaScript implementations quite heavily.

RB> That's true, and IMHO with good reason. I'm not sure what's
RB> hurting it on the browser side, is it a case of MS not implementing it?

Also, E4X was implemented in Mozilla Firefox and then, after a while, removed from the implementation. I don't know whether there was any conflict with regular ECMAScript, or if it was a code size/download time issue (odd, in this day and age) or whether, because other browsers didn't implement it, no-one was using it.

 Chris Lilley          
 Technical Director, Interaction Domain
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead
 Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG

Received on Wednesday, 11 August 2010 10:12:30 UTC