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

-- 
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 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 18 January 2011 05:55:06 GMT