W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > December 2012

[Bug 20201] polyglot markup and extensions via <script> (and <style>)

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 13:25:23 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-20201-2486-m94DSBlkj0@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>

Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
                 CC|                            |xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-i
                   |                            |ua.no

--- Comment #2 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> No, it can't. Design goal of polyglot is to produce same DOM when content is
> parser by either XML or HTML parser. HTML parser produces one text node from
> the content of <script> element even if the content is XML fragment. XML
> parser will parse content of <script> as any other element producing correct
> DOM subtree from XML fragment.

OK. Tested. And saw that you are right. So then I think that there are 3

1 EITHER the polyglot spec should describe how to circumvent these restriction
  by converting the content of <script> to a data URI.

2 OR the polyglot spec should carve out an exception from the principles, and
  allow CDATA inside SCRIPT. The *would* permit very similar DOMs. Except that
  in XHTML there would be a CDATA node, while in HTML there would not.

3 OR, for script/style, skip the "DOMs must be identical" rules.

CONCLUSION: In order to not touch the design principles, I ask the editor add
            to the spec a description of the first option (data URIs).

You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 3 December 2012 13:25:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:31:35 UTC