[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.
Thanks,
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