- From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 21:31:37 -0000
- To: <public-webapi@w3.org>
"Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com> > That's not backwards compatibility, backwards compat for a spec means > authoring to the lower version still works in the higher version. No spec > attempts to guarantee forward compatibility except possibly via fallback > mechanisms that cause future features to be ignored. I disagree, all well authored specs, particular in situations such as web api's where there is no way to tell what version of an API is in use (hasFeature is meaningless, and even if it wasn't there's no way yo're doing something useful if you say hasFeature 2.0 returns false when 3.0 returns true. > So I don't think this is a valid concern. It's a a very big concern for content authors, we can't know what environment we're running in, that means we will always be doing the 2 behaviour, this makes the 3 behaviour irrelevant. > I disagree. Leaving the ordering unspecified will likely result in > content accidentally depending on the ordering of whatever UA it is > tested in. I think you need to point to large amounts of code that does this, ie it's a genuine problem, I do not believe it is. >> You can in some current implementations, > > Which current implementations will let you have separate <foo onclick=""> > and foo.onclick handlers and fire both? Mozilla, see the code earlier in the thread. Cheers, Jim.
Received on Wednesday, 15 March 2006 21:32:49 UTC