- From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 23:06:56 -0400
- To: "Hallvord R. M. Steen" <hallvord@opera.com>
- CC: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Olli Pettay <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>, www-dom@w3.org
Hi, Hallvord- Hallvord R. M. Steen wrote (on 9/15/10 9:30 PM): > On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 03:20:58 +0900, Olli Pettay > <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi> wrote: > >>> However bz indicates there that returnValue doesn't make much sense >>> outside of IEs event model. There were also *no* counter comments >>> asking for reconsidering the bug resolution. > >> Yeah, I don't see reason to standardize returnValue. >> We're not trying to specify all the old event handling related things. > > IMO one of our goals should be to close the gap between specs and > reality / implementations. To do so, when we have non-standardised > features we should either get them into a spec or drop them. I understand this reasoning, but I don't think this has to necessarily be a reciprocal policy. I think it's much more important that implementations have complete and bug-free support of common specifications, than that they not support features that aren't in those specs. The reality is that there are some poorly-designed features that many browsers will have to support for legacy content, but where there are better-specified and more widely supported alternatives, I think it's counterproductive to also specify the non-standard feature. For example, keyCode and charCode. > Opera is *certainly* happy to stop supporting event.returnValue if > WebKit will do so too ;). Should I report a WebKit bug on removing it? > (Opera already has one). I would expect that they support it for legacy content. But I don't have a strong opinion about removing it or not. I would hope that authors would use the standard methods going forward. > Doug, you can probably close issue 132 since it seems there is a general > agreement not to standardise event.returnValue :) Okay, done. > As for Garrett's helpful responses, I understand that we've had some > controversies that means he is blocked from posting to the www-dom list > (unfortunately, since the tecnical content of his contributions is often > valuable though I can see why his style causes controversy.) > > I would rather not resume past flamewars, but I'd like the information > he brought to my attention to be recorded in mailing list archives: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2010JulSep/thread.html#msg142 > > How do I do that? Should I BCC him on replies rather than CC? (As a > test, he's BCCed on this E-mail.) I don't believe that he's blocked. Did he send an email that didn't go through? I can't see any in the queue. Regards- -Doug Schepers W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs
Received on Thursday, 16 September 2010 03:07:05 UTC