[whatwg] Fakepath revisited

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 1:29 AM, Smylers<Smylers at stripey.com> wrote:
>> Like other compatibility mode behavior, implementation would be
>> voluntary and not governed by the W3C.
> What "other compatibility mode behavior"?

IE has a huge "Compatibility View" and lots of additional settings
available. Firefox also has some about:config options available to
tweak behavior, and Opera has their site blacklist. But even without
adding such settings to the browser, bookmarklets and other tools can
help users work around poorly designed pages. In some cases, just
temporarily disabling JavaScript may fix the problem.

>> The bottom line is that no web developer wants to have a confusing,
>> unintuitive, and very permanent standard.
> There is much evidence to suggest that web developers are not happy
> either with the previous situation of lots of browsers picking their
> behaviour independently, leading to differences between browsers.
>> Don't punish all web developers for the poor past designs of the few.
> Unfortunately that's pretty much the modus operandi of HTML 5:
> standardizing previous stupidities so that we can all share in them.

Yes, we need a standard. Currently there are two competing behaviors,
each backed by multiple major browser vendors. Ian wants to
standardize on the stupider behavior and expects the remaining browsers
to implement it. That's going to be a problem.


Received on Thursday, 3 September 2009 09:23:37 UTC