- From: Malcolm Rowe <malcolm-what@farside.org.uk>
- Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 18:27:39 +0100
Hi Brad, > I think something we should be careful on is the performance of whatever > emulation layer we find is necessary in IE 6 to support these specs. > I've worked with other cross-browser emulation layers, some written in > JavaScript, and while they make life easier they can be really slow. Note that for Web Forms 2 particularly, the simpler parts are intended to be allowed to degrade 'automatically' to less-rich equivalents. For example, on IE6, an '<input type="email">' will be treated as '<input>', i.e., an untyped text field. So while a Web Forms 2-compliant UA might provide a special control for this type of input (possibly allowing the user to select contacts from their address list), a non-compliant UA will not require any special client-side handling. This is the same philosophy espoused by CSS, whose properties are designed to be both 'hints' (hence not critical) and backward-compatible (in the sense that the default behaviour of the property is usually the one carried out by a UA that does not implement the property). But I digress. One part of Web Forms 2 that will require client-side assistance is the replication model (there may be other parts; I've not checked a recent copy). I note that the spec describes creation of a client-side library as 'an exercise for the reader'. I wonder if, instead, development of a BSD-licensed IE6-compatible javascript emulation layer for those parts that require it (such as the replication model) should be included in the delivery of Web Forms 2? Regards, Malcolm
Received on Tuesday, 8 June 2004 10:27:39 UTC