W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: innerHTML in DocumentFragment

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:54:59 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJQvAuf+N26OV3UDHNATy4d18jyqu4GHC55227Dfzon+ejoA8w@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com> wrote:
> My thinking on this has evolved a bit since my original post. I wrote a
> patch to the spec that creates a new "unknown context" insertion mode that,
> in fact, only affects the problematic table case, and otherwise delegates to
> the in-body insertion mode.
> You can see it in full glory
> at http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14694
> Please let me know if that doesn't clear it up for you :)

What's your rationale for adding DWIM for those particular elements as
opposed to adding DWIM for all elements?

I don't want to add DWIM to support <html>, <frameset>, etc., but I'd
like to have good confidence that the selection of elements that we
add DWIM support for is the right set (neither too broad to drive up
implementation cost without use cases nor too narrow to end up needing
whack-a-mole tweaking later).

Henri Sivonen
Received on Thursday, 10 November 2011 13:55:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:36 UTC