Re: Review of the <template> spec

• From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
• Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 15:04:20 -0800
• To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
• Cc: public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Rafael Weinstein <rafaelw@google.com>
• Message-ID: <CA+c2ei8PHCeanhbHjBK1ZYFCthqo==E+c2+jbsL2-ssUbQqZTg@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 5:00 AM, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote:
>> 1. If DOCUMENT does not have a browsing context, Let TEMPLATE CONTENTS OWNER be DOCUMENT and abort these steps.
>> 2. Otherwise, Let TEMPLATE CONTENTS OWNER be a new Document node that does not have a browsing context.
>
> Is there a big win from this inconsistency? Why not always have a
> separate doc as the template contents owner?

Or why not always use the owner document of the <template> element?
Documents are fairly heavy-weight and introducing several documents
into the mix means that we have to deal with issues like making sure
that those documents have the same behavior (for example, if HTML
elements in those documents uppercase the nodeName or not)

/ Jonas

Received on Thursday, 13 December 2012 23:05:21 UTC