[whatwg] Arbitrary HTML in option-elements
ian at hixie.ch
Thu Dec 9 17:02:30 PST 2004
On Thu, 9 Dec 2004, [ISO-8859-1] Olav Junker Kjær wrote:
> > I don't want to say UAs have to ignore such markup, it could be quite
> > useful in certain cases (e.g. bidi markup). Equally we can't say it
> > must be supported, since some UAs have to use OS widgets and those
> > might not support arbitrary markup.
> OK, I get your point, but if it's useful and don't cause trouble in
> browsers which don't support it, why dont make it optional rather than
> forbidden? Appendix A will only be read by implementors anyway, HTML
> authors will use what works irrespective of whether its legal or not.
Because if you allow it, people will start asking that browsers implement
it, and unfortunately not all browsers would be able to (since some use
native widget sets).
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg