- From: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 17:45:20 +0700
- To: Stephen Chenney <schenney@chromium.org>
- Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>, "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 4:41 AM, Stephen Chenney <schenney@chromium.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com> > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 6:39 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> >> wrote: >> > >> > Hey, >> > >> > http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-domimplementation-hasfeature has a >> > weird lifeline basically for SVG and an open issue related to that >> > since it's not exactly clear what the details should be. Is SVG moving >> > away from the fantastical feature testing world as well? Should we >> > just simply always return true? >> >> If it would help, I could attempt to add use counters to Blink, get >> help determine how often hasFeature() is used, and how often it >> returns false. > > > Adding a UseCounter for hasFeature in Blink is non-trivial, but I am getting > a patch together for it. There was some double work, which I apologize for, but these counters are now in Blink: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=335301 In a few months, we should be able to say both how common hasFeature itself is and how often it returns false. Hopefully we can make it always return true or even remove it altogether. Philip
Received on Friday, 17 January 2014 10:45:48 UTC