- From: <Critterrathman@aol.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 13:12:53 EDT
New to the list, so please excuse if I am rehashing something that has already been discussed. I find it encouraging that WHATWG has undetaken the task to help those of us who do web applications. It is definitely frustrating that forms processing has been held in stasis since the W3C first took over the chore. I know that many of the enhancements being looked at will make my job easier and more polished. I certainly think there's a sweet spot in there that is a result of pent up demand. What I'd like to comment on, though, is the question of looking backward. Not just looking at the vendors who have decided to freeze their feature set, but also looking at those users who choose not to update to the latest-greatest version. As I understand it, one of the goals of WHATWG is to ensure non-breakage on older browsers. That is, the forms will still function properly, sans form and UI enhancements. Is this a correct understanding on my part? The other issue I'd like to put forward is whether we could a standardized set of JavaScript that would operate on a legacy browser, yet implement some of the ideas present with the forms extensions proposed. Yes, I know it will be a workaround (a hack), but perhaps it makes the question of supporting legacy browsers just that much easier to undertake - thus increasing the probabilty of success for the new standards. Thanks, Chris Rathman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20040709/3dfb5298/attachment.htm>
Received on Friday, 9 July 2004 10:12:53 UTC