Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #16281

Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id")

Message-ID <1838036.eqkHj45Kdk@PointedEars.de> (permalink)
From Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de>
Organization PointedEars Software (PES)
Date 2012-09-30 21:53 +0200
Subject Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id")
Newsgroups comp.lang.javascript
References (1 earlier) <k48a8p$he5$1@speranza.aioe.org> <k48ubc$ab6$1@dont-email.me> <k49gk3$3db$2@dont-email.me> <k49kg5$1bo$1@dont-email.me> <m2626vxr8u.fsf@nntp.bednarz.nl>
Followup-To comp.lang.javascript

Followups directed to: comp.lang.javascript

Show all headers | View raw


Eric Bednarz wrote:

> "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> writes:
>> 2012-09-30 16:14, Denis McMahon wrote:
>>> But the existing code is broken: document.all.formname
>> It does not work on modern browsers in "standards mode".
> 
> s/modern browsers/Firefox
> 
> (as far as mainstream desktop browsers are concerned)

ACK, it does work, for example, in Chromium 21 in document.compatMode === 
"CSS1Compat" (Standards Compliance Mode).  One should get rid of it (or at 
least does not prefer the corresponding branch) anyway.  One, it is 
comparably inefficient; two, it is comparably error-prone; three, it is 
*proprietary*.
 
>> But if the pages now use such constructs and generally work in browsers,
>> then the pages are apparently processed in "quirks mode". So fixing the
>> construct is irrelevant [...]
> 
> That is patently bad advice.

ACK.  It is primarily the undocumented, or poorly documented, uncertainties 
of the different Quirks/Compatibility Modes of different browsers and 
versions that bite you later, particulary with client-side DOM scripting.  
What is working today may very well break tomorrow.  Not so with Web 
standards (of whatever flavor), as today's browser vendors do strive to make 
their software *more* standards-compliant.


PointedEars
-- 
Prototype.js was written by people who don't know javascript for people
who don't know javascript. People who don't know javascript are not
the best source of advice on designing systems that use javascript.
  -- Richard Cornford, cljs, <f806at$ail$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk>

Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2012-09-29 18:15 +0000
  Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-09-29 22:17 +0200
  Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") dann90038@gmail.com - 2012-09-29 16:21 -0700
  Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") "J.R." <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2012-09-29 23:20 -0300
    Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") "J.R." <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2012-09-29 19:53 -0700
    Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2012-09-30 11:02 +0300
      Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2012-09-30 13:10 +0000
      Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2012-09-30 13:14 +0000
        Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2012-09-30 17:20 +0300
          Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") Eric Bednarz <bednarz@fahr-zur-hoelle.org> - 2012-09-30 21:09 +0200
            Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2012-09-30 22:28 +0300
              Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") Eric Bednarz <bednarz@fahr-zur-hoelle.org> - 2012-09-30 21:53 +0200
            Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-09-30 21:53 +0200
          Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2012-09-30 22:07 +0000
            Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2012-10-01 06:23 +0300
              Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2012-10-01 08:11 +0000
                Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2012-10-01 11:25 +0200
      Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") "J.R." <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2012-09-30 15:10 -0300
        Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-09-30 20:43 +0200
    Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-09-30 12:22 +0200
      Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2012-09-30 13:44 +0300
        Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-09-30 13:46 +0200
  Re: document.elementname vs document.getElementById("id") Dr J R Stockton <reply1239@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2012-09-30 20:10 +0100

csiph-web