- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 13:50:24 +0300
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Rafael Weinstein <rafaelw@google.com>, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>, Erik Arvidsson <arv@google.com>, Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com>
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 12:42 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > On Wed, 4 Apr 2012, Rafael Weinstein wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org> wrote: >> > >> > Perhaps lost among other updates was the fact that I've gotten the >> > first draft of HTML Templates spec out: >> > >> > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/templates/index.html >> >> I think the task previously was to show how dramatic the changes to the >> parser would need to be. Talking to Dimitri, it sounds to me like they >> turned out to be less "open-heart-surgery" and more "quick outpatient >> procedure". Adam, Hixie, Henri, how do you guys feel about the >> invasiveness of the parser changes that Dimitri has turned out here? > > I think it's more or less ok, but it has the problem that it doesn't give > a way to reset the insertion mode again while inside a <template>. I still think that breaking the old correspondence between markup and the DOM and shrugging the XML side off is a big mistake. Why would it be substantially harder to check inertness by walking the parent chain (which normally won't be excessively long) as opposed to checking a flag on the owner document? I strongly believe that this template contents should be children of the template element in the DOM instead of being behind a special wormhole to another document while parsing and serializing as if the special wormhole wasn't there. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2012 10:50:53 UTC