- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2010 22:40:32 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10692 Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED Resolution|NEEDSINFO |INVALID --- Comment #13 from Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> 2010-12-04 22:40:31 UTC --- (In reply to comment #10) > I thought this bug was about changing the coersion rules. However, statements > about javascript/DOM confuse the issue, since the coersion rules are not > implemented in browsers (and aren't intended to be and can't be for compat), so > do not affect javascript/DOM in browsers. > > Is this intended to affect non-browsers that implement the coersion rules, or > is this intended to affect browsers also? It was intended to affect both, however, it's now clear to me that I misunderstood how the Coercion to Infoset rules are used in browser environments. My bad. This all came about because I was trying to make sure that Henri's concerns about RDFa in HTML5 were addressed. However, now I think that this is a non-issue, and will continue to think so until Henri tells me otherwise. I was under the mistaken impression that the Coercion to Infoset rules somehow affected how the xmlns: declarations were translated into attribute names and prefixes available via the DOM. That is, given the following markup: ---------------------------------------------------------- <!DOCTYPE html> <html> <head> <title>An HTML5 Document</title> </head> <body> <h1>Example</h1> <p id="p1" xmlns:foo="http://example.org/foo#"> This is an example HTML5 document. </p> <p id="end">The end. </p> <script type="text/javascript"> var p1 = document.getElementById("p1"); var end = document.getElementById("end"); var attrs = p1.attributes; for(var i = attrs.length - 1; i >= 0; i--) { var p = document.createElement("p"); p.innerHTML = "prefix: " + attrs[i].prefix + ", " + attrs[i].name + " = " + attrs[i].value; document.body.insertBefore(p, end); } </script> </body> </html> ---------------------------------------------------------- The page above being loaded into an HTML5-capable browser would display this in the page somewhere: prefix = null, xmlns:foo = http://example.org/foo# I was under the impression that an XHTML-capable browser executing similar code: ---------------------------------------------------------- <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <title>An XHTML1 Document</title> </head> <body> <h1>Example</h1> <p id="p1" xmlns:foo="http://example.org/foo#"> This is an example XHTML1 document. </p> <p id="end">The end. </p> <script type="text/javascript"> var p1 = document.getElementById("p1"); var end = document.getElementById("end"); var attrs = p1.attributes; for(var i = attrs.length - 1; i >= 0; i--) { var p = document.createElement("p"); p.innerHTML = "prefix: " + attrs[i].prefix + ", " + attrs[i].name + " = " + attrs[i].value; document.body.insertBefore(p, end); } </script> </body> </html> ---------------------------------------------------------- would have produced this: prefix = xmlns, foo = http://example.org/foo# but instead, it produces this: prefix: xmlns, xmlns:foo = http://example.org/foo# I could have sworn that I ran this test when Henri first raised it two years ago and I got different results at that time. Previously, I had stated: I don't necessarily care how this is done as long as the Javascript that is executed on the document, intended to find "xmlns:*" mappings, doesn't have to have two code paths depending on if the document is in HTML5-mode or XHTML5-mode. After re-running the tests above, I'm convinced that two code paths for finding all "xmlns:*" values are not necessary. Apologies for the confusion, I'm marking the issue as INVALID, and setting it's state to CLOSED. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 4 December 2010 22:40:35 UTC