[whatwg] Re: Web Forms 2: Altenative to <select editable>
malcolm-what at farside.org.uk
Wed Jun 23 11:44:10 PDT 2004
Mike Shaver writes:
>> I'm not actually confident it is non-conformant (ECMAScript has lots
>> of get outs allowing all sorts of extensions.) but it's on the
>> interpretation of \b - Mozilla is more generous than the standard on
>> what concerns a character, it's better IMO, and I wouldn't bother
>> filing a bug as I'm sure it'll resolve as wont fix.
> I don't think the behaviour you describe is non-conformant, but I'll
> review the standard to be sure.
Bug 247179, now fixed.
> If you would file a bug about this case --
> presuming none already exists -- the Mozilla JS team would appreciate
I contacted Jim privately to get the details and filed the bug (and patch)
myself. Perhaps I should have mentioned it here, but it seemed off-topic for
More information about the whatwg