Accessing the form elements through "document.myform-id" doesn't work in XHTML files. But if i try the same mechanism, in HTML file, it works fine. Since I am using XHTML 1.0 transitional, it should work with XHTML file as well. In XHTML content, the JSCore throws TypeError, saying "document.myform-id" is undefined. I have tested this on Safari with latest nightly and Webkit/Gtk+ with latest nightly. [Note: The JS engine in Chrome supports this way of accessing forms.] See the test page below: --------------------------------------------------- <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <head> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="application/xhtml+xml; charset=UTF-8"/> <title>Form access </title> </head> <body style="background-color:white;border-left:0px;border-top:0px;overflow:hidden;" > <form id="myform" method="POST" action="about:blank"> <input type="hidden" id="name" value=""></input> </form> <script type="text/javascript"> document.myform.name.value="test"; document.myform.setAttribute("action","about:blank"); document.myform.submit(); </script> </body> </html> ----------------------------------------------------------
Who on Chromium team would know whether this behavior is intentional in Chrome, or just a bug?
ap, I am sorry .. I just checked in Chrome .. It doesn't work.. It throws same TypeError. But the same page, when served as HTML works fine in webkit. Isn't it required to behave same as in HTML?. Coz., the XHTML that I am using is 1.0 transitional. (In reply to comment #1) > Who on Chromium team would know whether this behavior is intentional in Chrome, > or just a bug? >
Are sure sure this works anywhere? Your example in bug 22378 used name, not id.
Right.. using 'name' works , Not by ID. (In reply to comment #3) > Are sure sure this works anywhere? Your example in bug 22378 used name, not id.
Per discussion above, it doesn't appear that there is any bug or inconsistency. Safari, Chrome and Firefox behave the same on the above test case, whether it's served as HTML or as XHTML.