[whatwg] Thoughts on HTML 5
dhtmlkitchen at gmail.com
Mon Dec 15 18:36:27 PST 2008
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 8:02 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage at gmail.com> wrote:
>> You're not Nicholas. We don't know if that is what Nicholas expects
>> his HTML to do or if he is expecting something else. In absence of an
>> example, I can't do much more than guess. I cannot expect your
>> assumptions to be correct.
> Well, of course, but you sent the message to the entire group, so you
> should be ready for answers from the whole group. ^_^
>> You've not stated how creating invalid HTML can "control scripts".
>> Having an interest in scripting, I would like to know how this works.
> Dude, come on. You're trying to poison the dialogue here. The point
Instead of a complaining about my intentions, why don't you post an
example that shows the problem (demonstrate need), how the problem is
overcome (the invalid HTML solution), and what browsers actually do?
I've seen code that has invalid attributes. These attributes won't
always have the same effect as the author wanted them to. Not all
authors expect the same thing from their invalid HTML.
Recent c.l.js discussions have included examples of page author using
a named element where that element does not support the name
attribute, e.g. <span name='fred'>. The author had expected the
element to be included with getElementsByName, but it wasn't. (not the
first time someone has expected nonstandard behavior from an
attribute). I've seen other uses of invalid HTML that did what the
author wanted to in most cases.
Valid HTML can have a clear and expected outcome. If something is done
according to standard, it can be expected that that something will
produce the outcome specified. If it doesn't, it would be your fault.
> As to how custom attributes can help control scripts, look into any
The <param> element is designed for associating data with a plugin,
such as a swf movie. Is this an allusion?
More information about the whatwg