On Tue, 10 Mar 2015, at 22:44, Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Mounir Lamouri <mou...@lamouri.fr> > wrote: > > > > On Tue, 10 Mar 2015, at 21:44, Jonas Sicking wrote: > >> I think I'd prefer to define "on" and "off" as defined values unless > >> there is very little usage of them. We can certainly mark them as > >> deprecated, but unless their usage is negligible, it seems better to > >> document their behavior than to try to change all existing content not > >> to use it. > >> > >> Especially since it'll also make the .autocapitalize JS property > >> behave less surprising "on"/"off" is used. > > > > "off" is defined. The "Non-conforming" note means that the attribute > > reflection will behave like this: > > ```js > > input.autocapitalize = 'off'; > > input.autocapitalize === 'none'; // true > > ``` > > Right. My point is that this is unnecessarily confusing. Just like > > input.autocapitalize = 'on'; > input.autocapitalize === 'sentences'; // true > > is unnecessarily confusing.
How is that different from ```js input.type = 'foo'; input.type === 'text'; // true ``` Unless we expect that doing |input.autocapitalize = 'on'| is common use case. Which I think isn't. > Just like leaving mention of "on" out of documentation and specs would > be confusing for authors that are looking at other people's code and > learning from it (which is one of the great powers of the web > platform). The specification should definitely mention "on" in a non-normative section. The same way it should mention "off" as an allowed but deprecated value. I will have to double-check that but I wonder if the IDL attribute isn't always returning undefined on Safari iOS. At least, I wasn't able to use it last time I checked. Would that solve your concerns? -- Mounir