- From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 02:53:53 +1000
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- CC: Mike Wilson <mikewse@hotmail.com>, 'Www-style' <www-style@w3.org>, 'Daniel Glazman' <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:22:16 +0200, Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com> > wrote: >> Anne van Kesteren wrote: >>> No, if we followed Internet Explorer we would have to introduce >>> differences between quirks and standards mode which is currently a >>> non-goal of the specification. We'd also have to figure out how >>> hasLayout affects everything as explained in this blog post: >> >> Simple then, don't allow quirks mode. Only allow the offset behavior >> to work in standards mode. > > That would be unacceptable to all implementors and is therefore not a > feasible way forward. So I guess your saying that all implementors will forever want to support quirks mode? Wasn't the Doctype switch introduced as a means to move towards a more stand complaint mode (leaving the mistakes of the pass behind). CSS0M will be used by implementation now (2008) into the future. Quirks mode belong in the pass along with implementations being fuzzy wuzzy with poor or ignorant coding from authors. As you have said on your blog. "They have introduced a new way to trigger standards mode that is not compatible with any other browser. In Internet Explorer 8 you can trigger standards mode using a Microsoft specific meta element. All other browsers will render the page in quirks mode." Quirks mode in IE is very different from quirks mode in other implementations. Standard mode in IE8 is very similar to the other implementations quirks modes as oppose to old IE quirks mode. This leaves one question. What quirks mode do you think you have to emulate with CSSOM? Alan
Received on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 16:54:45 UTC