W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > February 2008

Re: ElementTraversal comments

From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:20:59 -0500
Message-ID: <47C490CB.1040901@w3.org>
To: "Web API WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>

Hi, Simon-

Simon Pieters wrote (on 2/26/08 12:39 PM):
> 
> On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:27:01 +0100, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:
> 
>> I'm not sure how I can make it more clear without imposing undue 
>> restrictions on UAs.
> 
> I'd suggest to take a similar approach as HTML5:
> 
>    The language in this specification assumes that the user agent expands
>    all entity references, and therefore does not include entity reference
>    nodes in the DOM. If user agents do include entity reference nodes in
>    the DOM, then user agents must handle them as if they were fully
>    expanded when implementing this specification. For example, if a
>    requirement talks about an element's child text nodes, then any text
>    nodes that are children of an entity reference that is a child of that
>    element would be used as well.

That is very specific, which is good.  But I'm not comfortable with 
imposing such specificity on a UA, especially for what I see as an 
edge-case.

It may simply be ignorance on my part, but I don't know how all UAs 
handle that situation, and I don't have a good sense of what the 
implications of that are for a UA that might behave differently.  HTML5 
may be able to dictate terms like that, since it defines the parsing 
model as well as the API, but I don't feel that DOM-related specs should 
make such decisions.

I don't feel extremely strongly about this, so if I got corroborating 
feedback from more UAs (a non-browser UA that implement DOM would be 
great), I'm willing to change my mind.  Alternately, I'm willing to 
change the spec if that's the will of the WebAPI WG as a whole.

Regards-
-Doug Schepers
W3C Team Contact, SVG, CDF, and WebAPI
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2008 22:21:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 26 February 2008 22:21:17 GMT