W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: Implied Context Parsing (DocumentFragment.innerHTML, or similar) proposal details to be sorted out

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 00:25:09 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+c2ei8x7o8PSSC1xN8jzGWxAC16FsWq8uAgdcrz7Usp35FiOg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Rafael Weinstein <rafaelw@google.com>, Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Scott González <scott.gonzalez@gmail.com>
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote:
> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 2:56 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>>> That leaves the question of if the contents of the <script> should be
>>> parsed as a HTML script or an SVG script. The same question applies to
>>> <style>.
>>>
>>> Of course, ideally we would make the two parse the same way, but so
>>> far I've not been successful in convincing people here that that's a
>>> good idea.
>
> That wouldn't solve the problem here, because deciding between HTML
> and SVG not only affects the parsing of in-line scripts given in the
> element content but also affects the handling of external scripts in
> terms of varying the attribute that is used for designating the URL of
> the external script.

I'm not really sure I understand what you are saying here. But if the
concern is xhtml:href vs. src then I believe that the SVG team is
planning on allowing the src attribute for <svg:script> elements.

>> For what it's worth, the SVGWG thinks it's a good idea.  Let's team up
>> and vanquish evil.
>
> I think the SVG working group should learn to stand by its past
> mistakes. Not standing by them in the sense of thinking the past
> mistakes are great but in the sense of not causing further
> disturbances by flip-flopping.

For what it's worth, I've not seen any flip-floppying on this. Over
the years that I've asked the SVG WG the detailed question on if they
prefer to have the parsing model for <scripts> in SVG-in-HTML I've
consistently gotten the answer that they prefer this.

I'm also not sure how this is at all relevant here given that we
should do what's best for authors, even when we learn over time what's
best for authors.

/ Jonas
Received on Friday, 1 June 2012 07:26:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:52 GMT