Re: RegEx qualifiers
- From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 21:02:07 +0100
Matthias Watermann wrote:
In your previous posting <49B96EC9.6080001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> several
entries had qualifiers "Safe? no": What does that mean? (I can't check
your web-site at the moment because the arcor-ip.net routers seem to have
problems right now.)
It is the result of a new feature I intend to provide to make the ES Matrix
even more helpful (so checking the current version would not help).
Quote:
| [...] features have been highlighted with a greenish background color
| [in the aural stylesheet: "'marked with "safe to use"'"] if this author
| considers them safe to use without prior feature test even when
| they do not appear to be universally supported. This assessment is mostly
| based on the fact that the versions of the implementations the features
| require can be considered obsolete because the user agents known to
| implement them can be considered obsolete. Note that this assessment is
| likely to be subject to change as more implementations are evaluated. If
| taken as a recommendation for design decisions, it should be taken as a
| light one.
@all: What do you think about this?
PointedEars
.
- References:
- RegEx qualifiers
- From: Matthias Watermann
- Re: RegEx qualifiers
- From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
- Re: RegEx qualifiers
- From: Matthias Watermann
- Re: RegEx qualifiers
- From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
- Re: RegEx qualifiers
- From: Matthias Watermann
- RegEx qualifiers
- Prev by Date: Re: RegEx qualifiers
- Next by Date: Re: Works in IE not if FireFox?
- Previous by thread: Re: RegEx qualifiers
- Next by thread: Re: RegEx qualifiers
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
