Obsolete attributes #1491
Open
Obsolete attributes #1491
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Updating list of obsolete attributes to match WHATWG list.
Every attribute from the list can be found under
registerObsoleteAttribute,OBSOLETE_STYLE_ATTRS, orOBSOLETE_GLOBAL_ATTRIBUTESexcept for:rev- which shares name with RDFa global attributetypeattribute in elementstyle- which already has more advanced warning in Assertions.javacharsetattribute in elementscript- which is also handled separately in Assertions.java, where it shows warning only if value is other thanutf-8.I removed
ConformingButObsoleteWarnerclass, which is now handled byregisterObsoleteAttribute(<script language=javascript>was a duplicate with code in Assertions.java).I think it would also be good to change value types of all obsolete attributes to
string, but this PR is already pretty big, so I skipped it.This PR relies on #1487, which should be merged first.