W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > February 2005

[whatwg] Re: several messages

From: Jim Ley <jim.ley@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 16:18:29 +0000
Message-ID: <851c8d31050207081850746a37@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:09:02 -0500, Matthew Raymond
<mattraymond at earthlink.net> wrote:

> > Detecting whether a UA supports type="date" is easy (I do so in the demo
> > script). I don't really see what you mean here.
>       You're cycling through all the <input> elements to find one that
> has type="date". Most of your script is involved in that very task, so
> clearly a good amount of script is loaded and executed beforehand.
> That's hardly an efficient means of detection.

It's also not a successful means of detection, it _DOES NOT_ detect
suppot for input type=date, and in the previous discussion (before I
gave up listing the flaws in the script, of which there are still
many) I mentioned the fact along with the some cases where it fails.

Please Ian, stop saying that script is perfect when it is so clearly
not.  It's obvious you've decided the input type=date stays, and as
you're the only person who has change control on the specification
your decision is final, the fact that no-one else supports you is
completely irrelevant, but please don't use that script to create
pretend justification of the degradability of input type=date.

Received on Monday, 7 February 2005 08:18:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:39 UTC