1. 11
  1.  

  2. 7

    It makes me sad that so many web-developers are depending on nonstandard features, especially when standard-based alternatives exist, but it makes me even more sad that none of the browser vendors that have implemented .innerText up to this point have taken the time to write up a specification for it.

    1. 2

      The mentioned kangax piece on .innerText is a good background for why .innerText is a very useful property – how it differs from .textContent and why that matters etc: http://perfectionkills.com/the-poor-misunderstood-innerText/

      Nice to see an implemented spec in this area – extracting accurate text content from HTML, with proper white spaces etc, is not as easy as one can think, so any support like this is very welcome.

      1. 0

        Some time later, Webkit implemented their own version of it — a very different and quite incompatible implementation. Naturally, Blink inherited the Webkit implementation. Over the years implementations evolved independently.

        The likes of https://websvn.kde.org/?revision=959136&view=revision tell a quite different story - Mozilla started extending inner* in incompatible ways, and KHTML was forced to follow.

        1. 4

          That commit is not about .innerText but about .innerHTML, which is a very different thing. Setting .innerHTML is the fastest way to add arbitrary HTML content into a page, so unlike .innerText it’s genuinely useful for web-developers to be able to use it everywhere. Also unlike .innerText, .innerHTML has an interoperable specification, agreed on by the major browser vendors.

        2. -2

          I genuinely wish that Mozilla would refocus their efforts on creating a great browsing experience and stop with the moralizing rhetorical sniping about the Open Web (and stop with the pointless “features”, like the WebRTC video chat that no one asked for and virtually no one will ever use). I was around when IE pushed out Netscape. That happened because IE 4 was a great browser for its day, it really was. I felt about Netscape and IE back then the way I feel about Firefox and Chrome now.

          I want to like Firefox, I want to want to use it, I want it to feel fast and responsive. But every time I give it a chance I just end up feeling dissatisfied and annoyed, even after I’ve used it exclusively for months, and I don’t even use most of the “fancy” features of Chrome, like apps, so there isn’t much I should miss. The best thing Mozilla could do to promote the Open Web, and it is in desperate need of promotion, would be to make Firefox amazing again.

          1. 2

            I like the way the Tor Browser is configured, it uses Firefox ESR and does not (yet) include these crazy features, or they are disabled because they are also a privacy nightmare.

            Would be cool to configure Firefox without Tor in the same way (minus the private mode by default), not sure if anyone made this easy…