Ian Hickson wrote: > On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Kartikaya Gupta wrote: > > > > If a user-agent returns "true" from hasFeature() without actually > > providing a conforming implementation of the feature, then that's a > > bug in the user-agent, no? > > Sure. So's the fact that it doesn't have a conforming implementation in > the first place. Bugs are common.
That's only a bug if they /claim/ to have a conforming implementation. My point (which is what I think Sergey was trying to say) is that the Selectors API specification can't arbitrarily reserve the "querySelector" method name and declare that any DOM implementation that has such a method implements the spec. That sets a very dangerous precedent where other specifications could reserve other method names and greatly reduce the freedom for user-agents to provide vendor-specific/proprietary DOM extensions. The Selectors API *can* however reserve a feature string, because that's the entire point of the feature strings in the first place. --------------------------------------------------------------------- This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
