[whatwg] <base> elements, again
bzbarsky at MIT.EDU
Mon May 9 12:55:53 PDT 2011
On 5/8/11 12:11 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2011, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> The conclusion seems to have been to attempt to keep the spec as it
> stands, and try to get the remaining problems addressed via evangelism.
> I approve of such an approach because it means I don't have to do
> anything. Also, and more importantly, the spec as it stands now is
> somewhat sane and pretty much any behaviour to address the remaining
> compatibility issues moves us away from sanity.
> Have there been more compatibility problems reported with<base> in the
> past few months that would change this conclusion?
We've had more reports of the Unicenter failure, but no other new issues
reported, I believe.
More information about the whatwg