Re:Passive event listeners
by workmandan on Wednesday August 16, 2017 @09:43AM
(#15027352)
Although a nice idea in principle I think you'll just end up with horribly convoluted and hacky if/else logic throughout your code - much like the era of nasty IE6 kludges.
That's a good question. That <!DOCTYPE> things is that such mechanism, isn't it? (Or it was supposed to be.)
Perhaps the problem is that shipping, for example, two different Javascript engines would be too bad for browsers?
I want to know.
The WHATWG's philosophy for the HTML standard is never to sway too far from what browsers currently do, mainly to make sure that the browsers can keep up: https://whatwg.org/faq?#living-standard
The browsers seem to like that, so it's probably unlikely that we'll get a wildly different HTML6 anytime soon, if ever.
Yeah exactly. I can't even really find what I am trying to say, but Doctypes had some other piece of data with it. Was it a link or string to a spec? Like XHTML vs HTML4. Randomly I am sure that if you omit it, then it is "html5".which is random, shouldn't they have forced a spec HTML5?
That choice basically says to me that the idea of partitioning, or whatever those doctypes were for, is now abandoned.
But can't and shouldn't this be solved by some mechanism? Like, some umbrella "native-web-1" meaning that any project without that tag renders 2020 and below whilst anything with it as a brand new shiny implementation.
It would also help prevent the relentless "wow I really like that 2024 feature, lets make a shit version now today and another 7 over the years so that everyone is stuck with a dependency which doesn't even follow the specification" (promises etc)