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

Re: [XHR2] text/html and responseXML

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 13:27:34 -0700
Message-ID: <46ACF836.5040702@sicking.cc>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, "Web API WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>

Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> 
> 
> On Jul 28, 2007, at 4:04 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> 
>>
>> Jonas already mentioned it in another e-mail and this feature was 
>> indeed planned (by me 8-)) for XMLHttpRequest level 2. responseText 
>> already follows text/html rules for encoding detection etc. but for 
>> parsing we probably need to state that it needs to run with support 
>> for scripting disabled which affects how <noscript> is parsed etc. I'm 
>> wondering if we should do it like that or have scripts not run and 
>> parse <noscript> as if scripting was enabled. (I'm not sure whether 
>> HTML 5 has an option for the latter, but that's for instance how 
>> html5lib currently works.)
>>
>> Any opinions on this? Anything else I should pay attention too when 
>> adding this feature?
> 
> I would guess a popular use would be to grab HTML fragments and insert 
> them into the current document, in which case it would be desirable to 
> parse as if <noscript> was not disabled. I'm also not sure that 
> scripting needs to be disabled, at least in the non-cross-domain case. I 
> could imagine interesting uses for either.

The author always has the option of not including <noscript> elements in 
their response, so I think the usecase is still supported.

I'm a little bit worried that if we enable scripts for XHR (they are 
currently disabled in firefox) that sites would break. Though chances 
are probably pretty small. However if scripts are enabled we need to 
define exactly in which context they execute. Should they have their own 
'window'? If not 'window.document' would not refer to their own document.

/ Jonas
Received on Sunday, 29 July 2007 20:28:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:58 GMT