- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:32:11 +1000
- To: public-appformats@w3.org
Hi. Ian Hickson: > Why does it matter? The requirement isn't on the UA to distinguish one > from the other. The only requirement that uses the term "semantic-free" is > one that requires the UA to treat an element as if it was semantic-free, > which is something any UA can trivially do (since it is the default > behaviour when it doesn't know about it). The current text says: Similarly, XBL elements (other than the xbl element itself) that do not have a correct xbl element as an ancestor are in error too, and UAs must ignore them, treating them as they would any arbitrary semantic-free XML element. but some UAs don't ignore such elements. For example, when you give Firefox a document with only semantic-free elements, it displays the document tree. Perhaps the text should say something to the effect that they should not have the regular XBL processing? Also, should such in-error XBL elements still implement the relevant XBL DOM interface? I think it's problematic for elements to gain and lose interfaces if they are moved about the document. Thanks, Cameron -- Cameron McCormack, http://mcc.id.au/ xmpp:heycam@jabber.org ▪ ICQ 26955922 ▪ MSN cam@mcc.id.au
Received on Tuesday, 10 October 2006 23:28:49 UTC