Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 30, 2019. It is now read-only.

Sync up usages of "compatibilty caseless" comparisons used in the spec #216

Closed
travisleithead opened this issue Apr 18, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

Comments

@travisleithead
Copy link
Member

Cloned from bug: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16970

Apparently compatibility caseless matching is used due to legacy IE behavior, though browsers are pretty inconsistent in to what extent this matching is implemented. The current spec leaves it relatively undefined to avoid the problem. There is general consensus that having compatibility caseless matching is a can of worms, and we would prefer to remove it from the spec. Can implementations align on something else? What is the impact to web content? These are some of the question that should be resolved.

Used in:

  • <map name="..."> - the name value of a map
  • radio button name groups
@chaals
Copy link
Collaborator

chaals commented May 10, 2016

This might get match reality…

@r12a
Copy link

r12a commented May 24, 2016

Just for the sake of tidiness i'm added a link here to some online notes that Addison made.
https://www.w3.org/International/wiki/CaseForCaselessHTML

@travisleithead
Copy link
Member Author

FYI; Discussion ongoing at whatwg/html#1666

@travisleithead travisleithead added this to the HTML 5.2 WD 3 milestone Oct 24, 2016
@LJWatson LJWatson modified the milestones: HTML 5.2 WD 4, HTML 5.2 WD 3 Jan 10, 2017
@LJWatson LJWatson modified the milestones: HTML 5.2 WD 4, HTML 5.2 WD 5 Jan 17, 2017
@LJWatson LJWatson modified the milestones: HTML 5.2 WD 5, HTML 5.2 WD 6 Feb 26, 2017
@arronei arronei changed the title Tighten up usages of "compatibilty caseless" comparisons used in the spec Sync up usages of "compatibilty caseless" comparisons used in the spec May 30, 2017
@edent edent self-assigned this Nov 14, 2017
@edent
Copy link
Member

edent commented Nov 14, 2017

Looking at this for 5.3 - just to help me out, which sections of the spec refer to this?

Is it just a case of removing it, or do we need to update the language?

edent added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 29, 2017
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants