- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2008 15:24:10 +0200
- To: "Daniel Glazman" <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, www-style@w3.org
On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 15:16:48 +0200, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com> wrote: > Anne van Kesteren wrote: > >> There's no reason you couldn't do it on an empty document >> (document.implementation.createDocument() iirc). > > It's still an awful hack. Urgh, to say the least. It's like saying > |try { foo() } catch(e) { /* not implemented */ }| is better than > |if (typeof foo != "function") { /* same */ }|. I don't expect authors to do this. I expect them to simply code against what the user agent supports they're developing for. (Which is what I would do too, admittedly.) >> It's also not clear what advantage there is trying to feature detect >> first. As we know from hasFeature() and all similar mechanisms, user >> agents lie because of unknown bugs, because they need to get some page >> to work, et cetera. > > s/cetera/cætera/ :-) > > Anne, you really think we discover this _now_ ? I have always hated this > answer to this question because basically we decide not to implement > something because we feel implementors won't implement correctly... > That's called a free-hand. A license to kill if you prefer. I'd call it a design principle. :-) I think it's a rather good one. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Monday, 7 April 2008 13:24:33 UTC