[whatwg] Legacy alternatives

Critterrathman at aol.com Critterrathman at aol.com
Fri Jul 9 10:12:53 PDT 2004

New to the list, so please excuse if I am rehashing something that has  
already been discussed.
I find it encouraging that WHATWG has undetaken the task to help those of  us 
who do web applications.  It is definitely frustrating that forms  processing 
has been held in stasis since the W3C first took over the  chore.  I know 
that many of the enhancements being looked at will make my  job easier and more 
polished.  I certainly think there's a sweet spot in  there that is a result of 
pent up demand.
What I'd like to comment on, though, is the question of looking  backward.  
Not just looking at the vendors who have decided to freeze their  feature set, 
but also looking at those users who choose not to update to the  
latest-greatest version.
As I understand it, one of the goals of WHATWG is to ensure non-breakage on  
older browsers.  That is, the forms will still function properly, sans form  
and UI enhancements.  Is this a correct understanding on my part?
The other issue I'd like to put forward is whether we could a standardized  
set of JavaScript that would operate on a legacy browser, yet implement some of 
 the ideas present with the forms extensions proposed.  Yes, I know it will  
be a workaround (a hack), but perhaps it makes the question of supporting 
legacy  browsers just that much easier to undertake - thus increasing the 
probabilty of  success for the new standards.
Chris Rathman
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20040709/3dfb5298/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the whatwg mailing list