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

Re: [webcomponents] HTML Parsing and the <template> element

From: Rafael Weinstein <rafaelw@google.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 08:25:19 -0700
Message-ID: <CABMdHiQLars+Bu4NYwK_zOh1Z4nGnfxag80jbosF7xngfb2VMw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
I think I'm not understanding the implications of your argument.

You're making a principled argument about future pitfalls. Can you
help me get my head around it by way of example?

Perhaps:
-pitfalls developers fall into
-further dangerous points along the slippery slope you think this
opens up (you mentioned pandoras box)


On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 4:04 AM, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:48 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
>> Does anyone object to me adding <template>, <content>, and <shadow> to
>> the HTML parser spec next week?
>
> I don't object to adding them if they create normal child elements in
> the DOM. I do object if <template> has a null firstChild and the new
> property that leads to a fragment that belongs to a different owner
> document.
>
> (My non-objection to creating normal children in the DOM should not be
> read as a commitment to support templates Gecko.)
>
>
> --
> Henri Sivonen
> hsivonen@iki.fi
> http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
>
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2012 15:25:48 GMT

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