W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > August 2006

Re: XHTML Applications and XML Processors [was Re: xhtml 2.0 noscript]

From: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 08:13:51 -0400
Message-ID: <abd6c8010608030513v61e69084hb971917259733fde@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-html@w3.org

On 8/3/06, Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com> wrote:
> "Orion Adrian" <orion.adrian@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:abd6c8010608030446h34428894racf0124cb58bc175@mail.gmail.com...
> > This adds interoperability, speed and safety at the cost of increased
> > complexity and some additional verboseness.
> I don't actually see how it adds interopability, speed or safety, as you're
> not defining what happens if the script does things outside of the
> "required-content" ID, that is still undefined, just as it is now, so it is
> still the responsibility of the author to ensure that the content they're
> trying to modify exists, nothing has changed but you now have even more more
> complicated thing for the vendors to create.

Speed: "In this scenario the system only requires you do download as much of
the page as is needed before executing the script."

Safety: "This allows the author to make assumptions that he was not
previously allowed to make."

Interoperability: The SAX processor and the DOM processor now produce
the same results by letting the author specify what must be loaded for
correct processing.

And I did specify what to do: either disable the element or queue the
execution. It now knows what it has to wait for before it can safely

"Scripts that rely on content that has yet to be
rendered can be queued for execution or their elements disabled while
the required content is loaded (not necessarily rendered)."

Was this somehow unclear?


Orion Adrian
Received on Thursday, 3 August 2006 12:14:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:38:47 UTC