- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 08:46:37 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9843
Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|NEEDSINFO |
--- Comment #2 from Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> 2010-08-31 08:46:36 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Surely the script nesting level in this case (when you parse the
> document.written "</script>") is non-zero, and so you don't go down the path
> that blocks, you just go down the path that pauses the parser and resumes later
> when you're not nested. Or am I misunderstanding?
The spec says "yielding control back to the caller" in that case, which is what
Gecko does, but AFAICT, the spec yields the control back to the caller
depending on whether an external style sheet has loaded. This seems bad.
Am I misunderstanding something?
I'm inclined to make document.written inline scripts not check if there's a
"style sheet blocking scripts". (I realize that this requires a concept that
the spec doesn't currently have: the script element knowing if it was
document.written. In Gecko, an element is considered to be document.written, if
the '>' character of the start tag was document.written.)
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 31 August 2010 08:46:43 UTC