Sync HTML element interfaces C-D with the spec

Source/core/html/HTMLDivElement.idl

Index: Source/core/html/HTMLDivElement.idl
diff --git a/Source/core/html/HTMLDivElement.idl b/Source/core/html/HTMLDivElement.idl
index f8ab12231b0f98cf6a6baaf8b8284929ea00de6a..2f4a2c3d11654486e7b2111b0bfdeb5565c22759 100644
--- a/Source/core/html/HTMLDivElement.idl
+++ b/Source/core/html/HTMLDivElement.idl
@@ -17,6 +17,10 @@
  * Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA.
  */
 
+// https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#htmldivelement
+
 interface HTMLDivElement : HTMLElement {
+    // obsolete members
+    // https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#HTMLDivElement-partial
     [Reflect] attribute DOMString align;

[vivekg, 2015/03/08 09:46:41]

The inline comments like 'obsolete members' might go out-of-place in subsequent
changes and might become irrelevant soonish in a given context.
How about adding an extended attribute to the IDL like:

[Reflect, Obsolete] attribute DOMString align;

This way each attribute/method is properly accounted for being obsolete and 
if required, this could be further used to warn the web developers about the
deprecation.

Also if there exist an alternate way to achieve the same, we could also consider
using 'UseAlternative=XYZ'.

WDYT?

[vivekg, 2015/03/08 09:48:52]

We could possible reuse 'ImplementedAs=' here as well instead of inventing a new
one.

[philipj_slow, 2015/03/08 14:28:58]

These are the things listed separately in the HTML spec with a link "also has
obsolete members" from the main interface definition. They're not deprecated or
likely to be removed.

I actually kind of wish the HTML spec didn't bother splitting the interfaces,
since these things aren't actually going to be removed.

Is there some clarifying comment I could add to avoid the impression that these
should be deprecated removed?

[philipj_slow, 2015/03/09 11:20:07]

I'm going to land this CL as-is, but if you have suggestions here just say so
and I'll fix this and all of the other instances landed in other CLs.

 };