10342 2010-08-10 19:04:48 +0000 Make <wbr> element not conforming 2011-11-30 21:28:34 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG LC1 HTML5 spec unspecified PC All RESOLVED WONTFIX a11y P2 normal --- 13120 1 me contributor ian mike public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking xn--mlform-iua public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 37337 0 me 2010-08-10 19:04:48 +0000 First, I know this runs completely against Bug #9350. Since I'm neither in the WG nor have I've ever been involved into a process like this I don't know if this is the right process but I will just put my thoughts here for consideration: Major: -The <wbr> element is unnecessary because it clutters the DOM with things that can be expressed as unicode characters or named character references (often &shy; would be preferential since it adds a hyphen, else one that corresponds to U+0200B) -With <wbr> present but no corresponding element for a shy hyphen I fear a large use of <wbr> were a shy hypen would be in order. Minor: -It is not supported in Internet Explorer 8. 38868 1 ian 2010-09-10 23:11:26 +0000 EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: I think bug 9350 indicated that there are use cases for this and that it is widely used, while the costs of allowing it are minimal. So I don't see much value in dropping it. Nobody is forced to use it, indeed using &shy; is perfectly fine too. 50619 2 ayg 2011-07-03 17:16:10 +0000 *** Bug 13120 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** 50631 3 xn--mlform-iua 2011-07-04 05:55:43 +0000 (In reply to comment #1) > Status: Rejected > Change Description: no spec change > Rationale: I think bug 9350 indicated that there are use cases for this and > that it is widely used, while the costs of allowing it are minimal. So I don't > see much value in dropping it. Nobody is forced to use it, indeed using &shy; > is perfectly fine too. * I sharte Rouven's concerns. * My comment in Bug 9350 questions that there is any use case - there are only bad and misundestood implementations: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9350#c8 * In particular, browsers vary to a high degree: Bug 9711, in particular comment 2: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9711#c2 * In fact, <wbr> should not only become obsolete - it should also only have effect at all in quirks mode: Bug 13120. 53993 4 mike 2011-08-04 05:35:10 +0000 mass-move component to LC1 60702 5 ian 2011-11-30 21:28:34 +0000 EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: On balance, I think the use cases argued for in the aforementioned bug argue for keeping the element despite its current issues.