8550 2009-12-25 19:20:23 +0000 Add document.createElement("<div>") (Gecko quirks, IE)? [ms] 2010-10-04 13:59:52 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG pre-LC1 HTML5 spec (editor: Ian Hickson) unspecified Other other CLOSED WORKSFORME http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#apis-in-html-documents P3 normal LC 1 contributor ian annevk hsivonen ian jonas mike mjs Ms2ger public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 30249 0 contributor 2009-12-25 19:20:23 +0000 Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#apis-in-html-documents Comment: Add document.createElement("<div>") (Gecko quirks, IE)? [ms] Posted from: 91.180.133.13 30279 1 zcorpan 2009-12-28 10:11:35 +0000 Have you found a need to implement this in WebKit? 30454 2 annevk 2010-01-05 07:15:02 +0000 I'm not convinced we need to do this. I rather have it fixed in Gecko/WebKit. 30665 3 ian 2010-01-06 12:12:58 +0000 Can we file bugs on Gecko/WebKit for this? 30681 4 mjs 2010-01-06 19:34:17 +0000 WebKit does not support this functionality. I'm not sure why it's mentioned here. 30685 5 annevk 2010-01-06 21:37:42 +0000 Because you filed the bug. My bad. 30686 6 mjs 2010-01-06 22:04:06 +0000 I don't think it was me - I never file bugs through the comment form. 30687 7 annevk 2010-01-06 22:08:54 +0000 Oh, is ms Mike Smith? 30688 8 ian 2010-01-06 22:45:30 +0000 Ok, I'll file a bug on the UAs that do this and then reject this, unless anyone objects. 30691 9 ian 2010-01-07 05:55:23 +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: Only IE seems to do this. 30703 10 hsivonen 2010-01-07 08:51:21 +0000 (In reply to comment #9) > Rationale: Only IE seems to do this. FWIW, Gecko supports document.createElement("<div>") in the quirks mode. It doesn't support specifying attributes on the pseudo-tag and doesn't support this variant in the Almost Standards and Standards modes. http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/345 http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/file/abb82f981e02/content/html/document/src/nsHTMLDocument.cpp#l1225 The rationale for adding support was compat with IBM enterprise apps. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=245274 30705 11 ian 2010-01-07 09:06:04 +0000 Would Gecko be willing to remove support? Would Webkit/Opera be willing to add support? If we add support, can we do it in all modes? I really don't like mode differences, because, as demonstrated above, they are confusing. 30706 12 mjs 2010-01-07 09:32:23 +0000 (In reply to comment #11) > Would Gecko be willing to remove support? > Would Webkit/Opera be willing to add support? > > If we add support, can we do it in all modes? I really don't like mode > differences, because, as demonstrated above, they are confusing. > If the quirk is truly necessary for Web compatibility, then I would not be opposed. A few notes though: 1) The Safari team gets a lot of input on enterprise Web apps, including those produced by IBM. These are usually high visibility compared to the average Web compat bug. So perhaps this usage was never that common and/or has faded. 2) Should createelement("<div>") make an element with tagName "div" or tagName "<div>"? In Mozilla it is the former, in IE the latter, supposedly either was good enough for the enterprise Web apps that depended on this in 2004. 3) In general I prefer not to have quirks mode switches in the DOM. On the other hand, making an element with < or > in its name is pretty bogus, and results in an unserializable document, so perhaps in this case quirks-only is justifiable. 30708 13 annevk 2010-01-07 10:06:40 +0000 I filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=489532 a while ago. 30737 14 jonas 2010-01-07 19:07:20 +0000 (In reply to comment #12) > 2) Should createelement("<div>") make an element with tagName "div" or tagName > "<div>"? In Mozilla it is the former, in IE the latter, supposedly either was > good enough for the enterprise Web apps that depended on this in 2004. This does not match my testing. Both gecko and IE create an element with tagName "div" for document.createElement("<div"); IE even supports document.createElement("<div class=foo>"); which creates an element with a className of "foo". (any other attribute works equally well). Gecko does not support this attribute syntax though. I guess I don't feel strongly here. I'd be fine with attempting to remove this quirk from gecko. Dunno how much success we'll have with convincing Microsoft of the same though. 36977 15 Ms2ger 2010-07-17 09:45:22 +0000 The quirk was removed in Gecko: <http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/ecdf587c02d0>.