W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2009

Re: Serialization of PI misses ending question mark

From: Michael A. Puls II <shadow2531@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2009 17:21:45 -0400
To: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, Krzysztof Maczyński <1981km@gmail.com>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.u0iwai0z1ejg13@sandra-svwliu01>
On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 16:45:05 -0400, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Sat, 19 Sep 2009, Krzysztof Maczy�~Dski wrote:
>>
>> The ED says in section 9.4:
>> > If current node is a ProcessingInstruction
>> >
>> >     Append the literal string <? (U+003C LESS-THAN SIGN, U+003F  
>> QUESTION MARK), followed by the value of current node's target IDL  
>> attribute, followed by a single U+0020 SPACE character, followed by the  
>> value of current node's data IDL attribute, followed by a single U+003E  
>> GREATER-THAN SIGN character ('>').
>> It should rather say:
>> > If current node is a ProcessingInstruction
>> >
>> >     Append the literal string <? (U+003C LESS-THAN SIGN, U+003F  
>> QUESTION MARK), followed by the value of current node's target IDL  
>> attribute, followed by a single U+0020 SPACE character, followed by the  
>> value of current node's data IDL attribute, followed by the literal  
>> string ?> (U+003F QUESTION MARK, U+003E GREATER-THAN SIGN).
>
> Why? This is simulating PIs from HTML4, not from XML.

When PIs in the page are parsed into bogus comments, should the resulting  
comment value simulate PIs from HTML4 too by not having the end '?'?

<?xml-stylesheet type="text/css? href="file.css"?> -> <!--?xml-stylesheet  
type="text/css? href="file.css"--> instead of <!--?xml-stylesheet  
type="text/css? href="file.css"?-->?

If not, then parse(pi_node_markup_from_source_of_page) will return a  
different bogus comment than parse(real_pi_dom_node.innerHTML). The  
difference being the end '?' in the comment value will be missing from the  
latter.

-- 
Michael
Received on Saturday, 19 September 2009 21:22:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:48 GMT