[whatwg] HTML 5 : Misconceptions Documented
mikewse at hotmail.com
Sat Jan 17 05:18:07 PST 2009
Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Garrett Smith wrote:
> > If I understand this correctly, given a FORM with an INPUT
> > named 'b', if I change the name of that INPUT to 'a', then
> > form.b should return the element with name="a".
> > <snip>
> > What is the reason for introducing the "past names map"
> > behavior to the form?
> Compatibility with a legacy IE bug required (acording to
> Safari and Firefox devs) by legacy content.
I'm impressed with the level of detail that you strive for in
documenting real-world HTML :-)
> The idea of HTML5 is to make sure that a browser that
> implements all of HTML5 is compatible with legacy content.
> This is one of the things that legacy content requires, so
> the spec has to require it too.
> The idea is to make it so that browsers don't feel forced to
> add _any_ non-standard behavior (other than experimental
> innovations using vendor-prefixed names and stuff).
That's a good thing. Still, seeing this quite non-trivial
"feature-bug" being standardized, I see the potential for
making the standard unnecessary complicated if including a lot
of these legacy quirks. So I wonder what is your process for
determining if a "quirk" should be included in HTML5 or not?
Is there any listing of other quirks together with a yes/no
decision whether to include them in HTML5?
Also, what is the general ambition for compatibility with
legacy content? Until reading this thread I personally thought
HTML5's legacy compatibility revolved mainly around rendering
and document validity, but now I realize it has a lot to do with
script compatibility as well?
And please do not take this message as criticism, these are
just interesting (to me) questions that I couldn't find the
answer to on the whatwg FAQ.
More information about the whatwg