- From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 15:41:12 +1200
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals at opera.com>wrote: > Indeed, this thread began with a *request* to spec this out. From which one > might assume that there isn't a clear public spec, just some implementations > with at least some interoperability - suggesting the feature was deemed > useful enough to copy, and try to get it about right. Which makes a pretty > good starting point for deciding to spec it properly and make tests so we > can ensure interop, no? > Not necessarily. Some browsers implemented IE-compatibility features that are not really needed (any more?). Adam already reported this, but to be precise, here are all the bugzilla.mozilla.org bugs that have "innerText" in the summary: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc=innerText&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&query_based_on=&columnlist=priority%2Cassigned_to%2Cbug_status%2Cresolution%2Ccomponent%2Cop_sys%2Cstatus_whiteboard%2Cshort_desc%2Ccf_blocking_20%2Copendate%2Cchangeddate No new bugs have been filed related to the absence of innerText in Gecko since mid-2006. One person CC'ed themselves to one of the bugs this year. Someone made an informational comment in one of the bugs in 2008. There's no other activity. That's pretty strong evidence that innerText is not needed for compatibility, IMHO. I think it's also quite strong evidence that authors aren't feeling a need for it. But if Mike Wilcox or others want to make the case that innerText is actually a useful and needed feature, we should hear it. Or if someone from Webkit or Opera wants to explain why they added it, that would be useful too. Rob -- "Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." [Acts 17:11] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20100816/35520753/attachment.htm>
Received on Sunday, 15 August 2010 20:41:12 UTC