[whatwg] Fakepath revisited

On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 00:53:17 +0200, Robert O'Callahan  
<robert at ocallahan.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 3:56 AM, Aryeh Gregor
> <Simetrical+w3c at gmail.com<Simetrical%2Bw3c at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> Browser vendors cannot sacrifice compatibility for long-term goals,
>> because their users will rebel.
> We can sacrifice *some* compatibility for *some* long-term goals. We do  
> it all the time, even Microsoft. It's all about tradeoffs.
> In this case, I'd like to see a list of specific routers, sites etc that
> triggered the implementation of fakepath in Opera and IE. I'd like to
> crosscheck with our Bugzilla to understand why we haven't felt the need  
> to do this in Firefox.

We actually had pathless for a while and changed it to fakepath for  
compatibility with some sites that worked better in Internet Explorer and  
Firefox. Studying the sites we changed it for it seems to be no longer  
necessary for those, but changing it to pathless again does not seem worth  
it given that the IE Team apparently found more and that going forward  
authors should use <input>.files to be able to deal with multiple files as  

Anne van Kesteren

Received on Tuesday, 8 September 2009 05:57:40 UTC