- From: Jim Ley <jim.ley@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 00:30:53 +0000
On 2/11/06, Jim Ley <jim.ley at gmail.com> wrote: > On 2/10/06, Anne van Kesteren <fora at annevankesteren.nl> wrote: > > Browsers disagree on what should be selected in such cases. Simple testcase: > > > > <http://webforms2.testsuite.org/controls/select/009.htm> > > > > Opera 9 passes that test and I heard Safari nightlies do too. Internet Explorer > > and Firefox fail the testcase. Personally I would be in favor of changing the > > specification to be compatible with Opera 9 and Safari given that what they do > > is sensible. > > Why can't this be left undefined? what does it matter to have > interopable rendering on invalid DOM changes? Surely forcing code > changes on anyone is just a waste of implementation time here, not > updating the page when the DOM is changed to an invalid number is a > good optimisation? > > IE for example simply rejects the update (the size remains at 2), that > seems like a sensible approach, as does normalizing it to 1. > > I simply don't see the value in standardising the error behaviour here. Oh but if you do, I don't believe the Opera method of having the appearance of a 1, but a value of a size of 0 or -1 is correct. If corrections are made, the DOM should reflect the actual value used - after all that is the only thing useful to the user. Mozilla seems to correct -1 to 0 but nothing else. Cheers, Jim.
Received on Friday, 10 February 2006 16:30:53 UTC