W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-xml@w3.org > January 2011

Re: The interpretation of script

From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 00:55:02 -0500
To: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
Cc: public-html-xml@w3.org
Message-ID: <1295330102.22336.958.camel@desktop.barefootcomputing.com>
On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 00:16 -0500, John Cowan wrote:
> Liam R E Quin scripsit:
> > I see, thanks. I was wondering what sense it would make to have a script
> > element whose content you did not want to execute... 
>> [...]

> Because the HTML <script> element is one of the few in which you can embed
> absolutely arbitrary text (other than "</script>", obviously).

Or <style> possibly.  That says why you _could_, not why you might want
to.  On the other hand, HTML is a world in which people encode data in
the pixel values of PNG images, display them on an off-screen canvas and
fetch the values, which they can then interpret as JavaScript. So maybe
there's not much point in talking about semantics of elements.

Thank you for replying.


Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Received on Tuesday, 18 January 2011 05:55:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:58:27 UTC