Re: ISSUE-41/ACTION-97 decentralized-extensibility

On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:54:48 +0200, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>  
wrote:

>> IE has some arbitrary restrictions today. Most of these are based  
>> purely on limitations in the implementation of our current DOM and what  
>> we proposed removed those restrictions (for example we had nowhere to  
>> store the namespace relationship on our attributes).
>>
>> We talked about many of the limitations in the discussion with the HCG:
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-html-cg/2009JulSep/0075.html
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-html-cg/2009JulSep/0086.html
>>
>> The key differences:
>>
>> * We don't support nested namespace declarations where one should  
>> override another
>> * We don't support the namespaces on attributes
>> * We only allow prefix declarations on the root element
>
> Here's a few more differences; I suspect more would be found with deeper  
> study:
>
> * In IE the localName, prefix and namespaceURI attributes whose values  
> are given by the proposal are entirely missing.
> * In IE, a tagUrn attribute that's not in the proposal is present,  
> holding the namespace URI.
> * in IE, the nodeName attribute value does not match what is proposed.
> * IE will not treat elements with localNames that match an existing HTML  
> element as the relevant HTML element, even if it has a namespace prefix  
> - the proposal does not include that behavior.

* IE ignores xmlns="..." on tags that have the tag name of a known HTML  
tag. For instance, <mytable xmlns=foo> works but <table xmlns=foo>  
doesn't. I suspect IE does this because of compat with legacy pages that  
use bogus xmlns on HTML tags and expect HTML treatment.

I note that supporting xmlns only on unknown tags interferes with  
extending the set of known tags in HTML in the future.

-- 
Simon Pieters
Opera Software

Received on Thursday, 1 October 2009 21:41:40 UTC