- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 10:29:41 -0700
- To: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com> wrote: > On Monday, September 07, 2009 5:26 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote: >> It seems to me that the least damaging solution to avoiding requiring >> things that a vendor has vetoed would be keeping <keygen> conforming and >> in the HTML5 spec but making implementing it optional in the sense that >> it must parse the same way in all UAs but whether it on layers above the >> parser acts as HTMLKeygenElement or as HTMLUnknownElement is up to the >> implementation. > > I'm not sure being in the spec or defined elsewhere affects this since all > unknown elements should parse in the same way in a conforming UA. Except I think <keygen> parses different from unknown elements since it's a void element. / Jonas
Received on Wednesday, 9 September 2009 17:30:44 UTC