W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > January 2012

[whatwg] Augmenting HTML parser to recognize new elements

From: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 13:55:25 -0800
Message-ID: <CADh5Ky1u-+0bMuj5E3VcuCoV5e71W5miL7fuNAx6hd++JFzqMw@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Adam Barth <w3c at adambarth.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 1:29 PM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov at chromium.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov at chromium.org> wrote:
>>> Ah, that's a good question. This also must be specified. It should
>>> depend on the parent of the <content> element. If the parent is shadow
>>> root or <table>, then it should make <tr> the child of <content>.
>>> Otherwise, it should use foster parenting as usual.
>>
>> Oops, not "foster parenting", but "ignore" as you mentioned. Still
>> getting through the details of the parsing spec.
>
> There's also some subtly w.r.t. the pending character tokens.
>
> More generally, I think we'd all be much more sane if the HTML parsing
> algorithm was specified in the HTML living standard rather than
> modified ad-hoc in a number of different documents.

That makes sense, but how will we handle the fact that the elements in
the algorithm aren't part of the HTML specification?

:DG<

>
> Adam
>
>
>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa at webkit.org> wrote:
>>>> What if content wrapped elements ignored by the parser. e.g.
>>>> <content><tr>hi</tr></content>
>>>>
>>>> What should the content element include in that case?
>>>>
>>>> - Ryosuke
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 18, 2012 10:19 AM, "Dimitri Glazkov" <dglazkov at chromium.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 'sup, Whatwg!
>>>>>
>>>>> The new HTML elements in the shadow DOM spec
>>>>> (http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/shadow/index.html)
>>>>> and the nascent HTML templates spec (see it all explained here:
>>>>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/explainer/index.html)
>>>>> require tweaking of the HTML parsing behavior -- mostly the tree
>>>>> construction bits.
>>>>>
>>>>> A typical example would be specifying an insertion point (that's
>>>>> <content> element) as child of a <table>:
>>>>>
>>>>> <table>
>>>>> ? ?<content>
>>>>> ? ? ? ?<tr>
>>>>> ? ? ? ? ? ?...
>>>>> ? ? ? ?</tr>
>>>>> ? ?</content>
>>>>> </table>
>>>>>
>>>>> Both <shadow> and <template> elements have similar use cases.
>>>>>
>>>>> What would be the sane way to document such changes to the HTML parser
>>>>> behavior? A list of modifications to tree construction modes in each
>>>>> respective spec? Some "generic insertion point element" clause in the
>>>>> HTML spec? Give me ideas.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also -- what are the side effects of such a change? Surely, there's
>>>>> something I am not thinking of.
>>>>>
>>>>> :DG<
Received on Wednesday, 18 January 2012 13:55:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:09:10 UTC