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

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

From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 14:16:00 +0100
To: www-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <eassuf$275$1@sea.gmane.org>

"Orion Adrian" <orion.adrian@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>> 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."

Yet you said if there's no required attribute it's executed immediately, 
that means the current default is in exactly the state as it is now, so 
there's no more safety involved.

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

I don't see how that contributes to safety.

> 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.

No they don't, since the script can still continue to do unsafe things, 
you've in no way restricted what a script can do.

> "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?

Nope, the problem is other scripts, which you've not changed, so the problem 
of interopability hasn't changed.

Received on Thursday, 3 August 2006 13:16:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:06:13 UTC