- From: Justin Wood <jw6057@bacon.qcc.mass.edu>
- Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 03:59:25 -0400
- To: W3C Style List <www-style@w3.org>
- Cc: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Andrew Fedoniouk wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi> >To: "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org> > > > >>>Where does it say in the XHTML spec that incremental display must be >>>disabled for that media type? >>> >>> >>Nowhere. It is an just unimplemented feature in those browsers. >> >> >> > >Strictly speaking, XHTML parser (UA) must read </html> to decide if document >well-formed (valid) or not. >And only ather that render document as it *must* be well-formed [1]. > >This the end of era of incremental rendering... > >[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#h-4.1 > >Andrew Fedoniouk. >http://terrainformatica.com > > Technically, unless I misread in places, we (any UA) *can* render up to a point where a "mal-formedness" occurres and then either "drop" all rendering up to taht point and put up a malformed error, or just leave all rendering up to that point and note the error. But to do so reliably would be harder to code than our current "get all document first" method.... the "incremental rendering" (in XHTML) would have to assume that any open tag is closed correctly, until it is not...a bit harder than it sounds at first.., Though Yes, I do agree that in terms of a strict "Well Formed" checking UA, there would be _no_ room for incremental rendering, since you cannot be sure if it is well formed until the </html> tag ~Justin Wood
Received on Tuesday, 27 July 2004 04:01:06 UTC