On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 2:33 AM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote: > John Barton wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> I should have also included: >> >> 2A) Hopefully, overtime, the old script syntactic goal will fade >> from use, and the module goal will become the norm for new code. >> >> >> Now here is a reason, finally, for all the extra complexity the two goals >> cause. >> >> If we want to kill script, let's not stab it with a dull pencil. Let's >> make Loader and System be modules, not globals. Then you cannot load modules >> with <script>, only with <module>. > > > We are not killing <script>> Dream on! > > Introducing a new HTML element with implicit CDATA content model will > require the old > > <module> > <!-- hide script here > if (a < b) { console.log("<\/script> haha"); } > --> > </module> > > hacks. This won't do anything (even render the HTML-commented-out fallback > content) in old browsers, which will make it hard to work in both new and > old. > > Using <script> with a new attribute has several advantages, in contrast: > > 1. No need for the return of the HTML comment-hiding hack I invented in > Netscape 2 to avoid inline script content showing as fallback in > pre-Netscape-2 browsers. > > 2. Old browsers ignore the new attribute will process the content, which > could be written to work "both ways".
Is a new attribute necessary? What about using @type? Thanks, David > But mainly: no way to kill script. Amending above words: do not dream on, > wake up! > > /be > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
