- From: Hallvord Reiar Michaelsen Steen <hallvors@online.no>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 21:34:17 +0200
On 21 Jun 2004 at 14:16, Ian Hickson wrote: > I don't really know what a good solution is. hasFeature() doesn't really > work; since it is highly likely that WF2 will be implemented piecemeal, > like all other specs. (I have put a hasFeature string into the spec, but I > don't think it is enough.) > > I'm open to suggestions. Would be best to make good use of hasFeature rather than resort to hacks or plain UA name sniffing. One could "modularise" the WF2 spec somewhat, and specify minor version numbers for the various bits? Call the extra INPUT type elements and the validation events 2.01, the repeat model 2.02 etc.. Or perhaps make a little hack for the name.. document.implementation.hasFeature('WebForms+repetition', '2.0') anyone? -- Hallvord Reiar Michaelsen Steen hallvors at online.no / www.hallvord.com
Received on Wednesday, 23 June 2004 12:34:17 UTC