- From: ryan <ryan@theryanking.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 00:01:41 -0700
On Apr 9, 2007, at 10:27 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > On Apr 8, 2007, at 11:12 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote: > >> At http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2007/04/html_5.html PPK >> suggests having an attribute for storing private data for scripts. >> >> Currently, one can invent an attribute and it will work for >> scripts. However, it will look ugly for conformance checking. >> Since this is essentially a conformance definition issue as >> browsers would not be required to implement anything new (assuming >> a new reflecting attribute on HTMLElement is deemed unnecessary), >> adding an attribute for script-private data would be rather easy. >> >> I think it would be worthwhile to add an attribute for script- >> private data to common attributes, so that scripters who need one >> and want to be conforming don't need to abuse e.g. title. > > The class attribute can already be used for script-private data. I > think the time script authors go for made-up attributes is when > they need a set of key-value pairs. Class is not so great for that, > but I'm not sure any new attribute would be either, unless it > provided some sort of built-in key-value parsing. If you want structured data in this attribute, why not just use JSON? -ryan
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2007 00:01:41 UTC