Mozilla supports the innerHTML methond and it's not a standard...the click() methond is not covered by the DOM, because it's outside of the scope of what DOM is. It's more of a browser specific javascript extension. These are the kind of things that make browsers different. You sound very socialist when you say that if it isn't a standard, so it shouldn't be in there. Innovation is a good thing where I come from...
If the Mozilla people don't want it that's fine with me, I'll file my vote and be on way. My current web pages are compatible with IE and Moz, but the file upload widget on the page I was making the other day when I posted my original message, looks really standard gray in Moz and nice in IE. Thanks to Jason for pointing out that the is already a bug filed on this. Have a nice standard day. jon S�ren Kuklau wrote: > "jon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > >>dude chill. It would be the site that was annoying you, not the browser. >> Feel free not to visit sites that annoy you...I don't care. >>It's used for many other things, emulating a user click is a very handy >>shortcut for a lot of situations, like innerHTML. >> > > innerHTML to my knowledge is yet another proprietary Microsoft thing. > > >>It's just really handy for styling the file input widget, which only IE is >> > able to style at > >>all. >> > > If it doesn't work in Mozilla, then it's probably not in any standard. So IE > shouldn't be able to do it either. > > >>Mozilla gives the developer no control over it at all. >> > > It shouldn't. > > >>The reason most sites look horrible in Netscape 4.x these days is >>because developers were not given the power the IE gave them, so they >>stopped developing for it. Probably because someone was afraid a feature >>would annoy some nit-picker *cough*. >> > > If you call strict standards _non_-compliance power... > > Actually, Netscape 4 is from mid-97, so you can hardly compare it with a > recent IE. > > >
