W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2010

Re: <iframe doc="">

From: Michael A. Puls II <shadow2531@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 00:47:13 -0500
To: "Aryeh Gregor" <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
Cc: "Karl Dubost" <karl+w3c@la-grange.net>, "Edward O'Connor" <hober0@gmail.com>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, "public-html WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.u6nw0zkf1ejg13@sandra-svwliu01>
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 22:43:46 -0500, Aryeh Gregor  
<Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Michael A. Puls II
> <shadow2531@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Here's an example of @doc vs. @src="data:text/html,":
>>
>> <!DOCTYPE html>
>> <html>
>>    <head>
>>        <meta charset="utf-8">
>>        <title></title>
>>    </head>
>>    <body>
>>        <iframe
>> src="data:text/html;charset=utf-8,%3C!DOCTYPE%20html%3E%0D%0A%3Chtml%3E%0D%0A%20%20%20%20%3Chead%3E%0D%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%3Cmeta%20charset%3D%22utf-8%22%3E%0D%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%3Ctitle%3Etest%3C%2Ftitle%3E%0D%0A%20%20%20%20%3C%2Fhead%3E%0D%0A%20%20%20%20%3Cbody%3E%0D%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%3Cp%3Etest%3C%2Fp%3E%0D%0A%20%20%20%20%3C%2Fbody%3E%0D%0A%3C%2Fhtml%3E"></iframe>
>>        <iframe
>> src="data:text/html;charset=utf-8;base64,PCFET0NUWVBFIGh0bWw%2BDQo8aHRtbD4NCiAgICA8aGVhZD4NCiAgICAgICAgPG1ldGEgY2hhcnNldD0idXRmLTgiPg0KICAgICAgICA8dGl0bGU%2BdGVzdDwvdGl0bGU%2BDQogICAgPC9oZWFkPg0KICAgIDxib2R5Pg0KICAgICAgICA8cD50ZXN0PC9wPg0KICAgIDwvYm9keT4NCjwvaHRtbD4%3D"></iframe>
>>        <iframe doc='<!DOCTYPE html>
>> <html>
>>    <head>
>>        <meta charset="utf-8">
>>        <title>test</title>
>>    </head>
>>    <body>
>>        <p>test</p>
>>    </body>
>> </html>'></iframe>
>>    </body>
>> </html>
>
> That's not a fair comparison, I don't think.  You don't need to
> urlencode everything in the data URL,

Yeh, you can get away with it if you're careful, but it's currently not  
proper.

> and most of the boilerplate you
> give can be omitted in text/html.

True. But I don't personally omit that stuff in a regular page. I don't  
think I would in an embedded page either.

> On the other hand, you don't need
> to include all the boilerplate for doc="".  So the real comparison is
>
> <iframe doc="<p>test">
>
> vs.
>
> <iframe src='data:text/html,<!doctype html><p>test'>
>
> The difference is fairly minor.

Yes, Ian's example showed that @doc is just for fragment markup where  
standards mode would always be applied and, because it's interpreted as  
html, HTML, HEAD, BODY (and perhaps TITLE) would be implied and the markup  
would always end up inside BODY. And, if you make use of implicit closings  
etc. you can keep things much shorter.

However, I still like the idea of explicitly specifying full markup for  
the embedded doc like you can with src="data:". I also like being able to  
do src="data:application/xml," in text/html pages.

-- 
Michael
Received on Sunday, 17 January 2010 05:47:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:12 UTC