- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 14:30:45 +0100
- To: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>
- Cc: "Alexey Proskuryakov" <ap-carbon@rambler.ru>, "Bjoern Hoehrmann" <derhoermi@gmx.net>, public-webapi@w3.org
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:58:24 +0100, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: > I think it might be wiser to add a .responseHTML that works for HTML > documents in the future, since you can test for a new property from > script but you can't test for new behavior of an existing property. And > that could in principle have different rules for choosing the text > encoding. You would simply test if .responseXML is non-null. However, I don't really like that we get different character encoding detection schemes on a per property basis. I rather have it on a resource basis. So that responseText always uses the same decoding as responseXML, etc. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Monday, 26 February 2007 13:31:10 UTC