- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 09:13:44 +0000
- To: public-html-admin@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23152
Bug ID: 23152
Summary: Call out that content model: Text, in HTML, depends on
the kind of element
Classification: Unclassified
Product: HTML WG
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
URL: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-pa
ge.html#text-content
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: HTML5 spec
Assignee: dave.null@w3.org
Reporter: xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no
QA Contact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
CC: mike@w3.org, public-html-admin@w3.org,
public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org
PROBLEM:
The spec defines ‘content type’ like so:
“A normative description of what content must be included
as children and descendants of the element.”
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-page.html#element-dfn-content-model
And like so:
“Each element defined in this specification has a content
model: a description of the element's expected contents”
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-page.html#element-dfn-content-model
However, the exact meaning of such a ”normative description”
is not decided by the code but by the result in the DOM:
“The contents of an element are its children in the DOM”
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-page.html#concept-html-contents
However, for most of the ”standard” content models, this is
not a problem. For instance, the meaning of “flow content” is
unambiguous.
But, viewed from code/author level, then, for
“content model: Text”, the meaning varies, see below.
This is a gotcha. And should be called out in the the
very definition of ”content type: Text”.
PROPOSAL:
Inside the definition of “content model: Text”, call out
that the meaning of ”Text” on the *code level* depends on
A. Element kind: Whether the element is a normal element, a raw
text element, an escapable raw text element etc
B. For some of the element kinds: Whether the element
occurs inside XHTML or HTML
C. Whether there are "extra constraints"
D. May be “whether the contents is an element or an
attribute” should be mentioned as a condition.
(Currently, the “extra constraints” condition, is the only
condition that is mentioned)
EXACT TEXT SUGGESTION:
”For elements in HTML, the meaning of “content model:
Text” also depends the kind of element. For instance,
an ”<” inside <textarea> does not need to be escaped
in HTML because it is a raw text element. (This does not
apply to XHTML. In XHTML, the kind of element doesn’t
affect the meaning of ‘content model: Text’)”
JUSTIFICATION:
The section on Terminology states:
“when the specification states that a feature applies to
the HTML syntax or the XHTML syntax, it also includes the
other. When a feature specifically only applies to one of
the two languages, it is called out by explicitly stating
that it does not apply to the other format, as in "for
HTML, ... (this does not apply to XHTML)".”
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 4 September 2013 09:13:51 UTC