W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2007

Re: Why HTML should be taught as HTML without pretending it is XML

From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:55:53 +0200
To: "Robert Burns" <rob@robburns.com>, "Jon Barnett" <jonbarnett@gmail.com>
Cc: public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.tvxirfv8idj3kv@hp-a0a83fcd39d2>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:39:44 +0200, Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com> wrote:

>> To that, I'll add that document.createElement(), one of the most basic
>> DOM methods, creates an element without a namespace.  If this
>> quasi-XHTML eventually gets served as XHTML, even
>> document.createElement would have unintended consequenses.
>>
>
> I forgot to respond to this point. Again, this strikes me as another  
> non-issue. When working with documents within just the HTML namespace,  
> it's important to be consistent in those DOM calls. I don't know of any  
> XHTML implementation that has a problem with creatElement() as long as  
> you stick with non-NS methods throughout. Obviously , you cannot work  
> with multiple namespace elements within one document. However, that  
> should be the biggest caveat of all when vending as text/html: do not  
> mix elements from different namespaces.

Consistency is not an issue.

The issue is that, per spec, createElement() creates an element *in no  
namespace*. Not in the HTML namespace. Only Safari follows the spec on  
this point. Firefox uses the HTML namespace if the Document node  
implements the HTMLDocument interface (which is when you use  
application/xhtml+xml). Opera uses the same namespace as the root  
element's namespace.

    http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-3-Core/core.html#ID-2141741547

-- 
Simon Pieters
Opera Software
Received on Monday, 23 July 2007 17:56:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:47 UTC