- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 01:12:58 +0000 (UTC)
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, liorean wrote: > > On 25/01/06, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen at iki.fi> wrote: > > On Jan 25, 2006, at 19:50, liorean wrote: > > > So, how about dropping id uniqueness then? > > UAs will have deal with author-introduced duplicate ids anyway, so > > parser-introduced duplicates are not a big deal. > > Well, the difference is that they can deal with that any way they > like; including just going by the first/last occurence, thus in fact > ensuring uniqueness in the DOM. Parser introduced duplicate ids > require moving the handling of duplicate ids to when you're trying to > use them for referencing an element; with solutions such as giving a > nodelist instead of a node as return value from getElementById, which > would in most cases break the script anyway. In practice it really isn't a problem. Safari and Mozilla have both been doing this for years with no ill effects of that nature that I'm aware of. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 10 March 2006 17:12:58 UTC