- From: Kyle Simpson <getify@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 09:55:48 -0600
> You may be correct in that people may never want to set preload to false. > You'll note that I put in my proposal that an alternate approach would be > for preload to be set to true by default. Since your proposal also says that setting `preload` to `false` wouldn't do anything except not *require* the preload (in other words, it wouldn't strictly prevent the preload), then what would be the use of someone being able to set it to `false`? In other words, what's the benefit of being able to tell the browser, "Preloading is not required, but you can still preload if you want to?" That seems basically like a moot no-op. If preload is going to default to `true`, and setting it to `false` is really a moot functionality, we're almost back to my core proposal, except for the fact that having an explicit `preload` property gives an admittedly nicer feature-detect. > This would allow even easier feature detection... Honestly, whether `preload` defaults to `false` or `true`, your feature-detect for your proposal can be more simplified (no use of `typeof`) like this: if (script.preload === true) /* or */ if (script.preload === false) > I think changing the behavior of dynamic script elements to match IE's isn't > a bad idea, but... Nicholas, I would still like to hear your thoughts/response on the core reason I'm pushing to **identically** match IE: that if we specify something that IE will have to change about their implementation, we're automatically pushing out the time-frame of when we might possibly get to full-compat on this issue, from say 4-8 months (reasonable for all other browsers to respond) to 1-2 years (the typical release-cycle for IE). I have conceded that your v2.1 proposal is both more semantic and has a better feature-detect than my proposal. BUT, as is often the case, the pragmatics of how we can achieve full-compat sometimes outweigh the benefits of holding out for the more "correct" solution. Given the convergence of proposals, with that point being really the last major sticking point, I think it's time to start talking in terms of the pragmatics. I believe this is a case where the pragmatics of existing implementation and spec wording have greater influence than the desire to create new precedent for the sake of correctness. --Kyle
Received on Monday, 14 February 2011 07:55:48 UTC