W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > July 2004

[whatwg] type="datetime" demo

From: Jim Ley <jim.ley@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 16:23:26 +0100
Message-ID: <851c8d3104071508231833e032@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 15:11:04 +0000 (UTC), Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Jul 2004, Jim Ley wrote:
> >
> > My UA is irrelevant, any competent scripter uses some same basic
> > techniques, none of which were prevalent in the example. If you can't
> > see that that will fail in lots of UA's, you simply shouldn't be
> > scripting.
> As far as I can tell, the script in the page in question is fully ECMA-262
> compliant, and the DOM is fully W3C DOM2 HTML compliant.

Then I'd look carefully again at the specifications, nowhere is
GLOBALOBJECT.document defined in either of those (or indeed any other
specification)  neither do you even use DOM methods to even
investigate that the browsers are indeed DOM2 or DOM2 HTML available,
which is perhaps more important.

> If the script errors, it's a UA bug. 

Even if it your script only used DOM2 HTML elements, it wouldn't be a
UA bug it would just not be a DOM2 compliant UA - and there's _very_
few of those about.

> > The comp.lang.javascript FAQ is a good place to start if you wish to
> > learn.
> I read this document but was unable to find anything relevant. Could you
> point me to the specific entry you were presumably referring to?

Well, I'd look at a lot of basic resources, so section 3.0,  but the
specifically relevant part is of course:

<URL: http://jibbering.com/faq/faq_notes/not_browser_detect.html#bdFD >

Received on Thursday, 15 July 2004 08:23:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:35 UTC