W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > October 2010

[Bug 9659] Initial U+0000 should not set frameset-ok to "not ok"

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 07:10:17 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1P1Zl3-0007Mg-Ql@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9659

--- Comment #22 from Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> 2010-10-01 07:10:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #21)
> We used to have a two-step tree constructor with basically two sets of
> branches, and it was not very clear. Why would we reintroduce it? 

Conceptually, we want stuff to behave as if we were in the foreign lands if the
current node is not an HTML node and the current node is not one of the special
nodes that take HTML children. It's weird not to have this conceptual model map
one-to-one to spec text and to have the spec instead manage the "in foreign
content" insertion mode--often with bugs so that it's not actually one-to-one
to the conceptual model.

> I really
> don't understand why you think that would be clearer.
> 
> The current model is nice and clear, IMHO: it treats foreign content in a
> manner analogous to table content or <select> content. What's the problem?

The bugs around <svg></svg><![CDATA[foo]]> and
<svg><foreignObject><div><![CDATA[foo]]></div></foreignObject></svg> (or indeed
U+0000 in place of CDATA!) show that the current model of having "in foreign"
as a mode (as opposed to being a special case before switching on mode) is not
nice and clear.

-- 
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 Friday, 1 October 2010 07:10:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:30:57 UTC