- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2010 22:40:32 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10692
Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED
Resolution|NEEDSINFO |INVALID
--- Comment #13 from Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> 2010-12-04 22:40:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> I thought this bug was about changing the coersion rules. However, statements
> about javascript/DOM confuse the issue, since the coersion rules are not
> implemented in browsers (and aren't intended to be and can't be for compat), so
> do not affect javascript/DOM in browsers.
>
> Is this intended to affect non-browsers that implement the coersion rules, or
> is this intended to affect browsers also?
It was intended to affect both, however, it's now clear to me that I
misunderstood how the Coercion to Infoset rules are used in browser
environments. My bad.
This all came about because I was trying to make sure that Henri's concerns
about RDFa in HTML5 were addressed. However, now I think that this is a
non-issue, and will continue to think so until Henri tells me otherwise.
I was under the mistaken impression that the Coercion to Infoset rules somehow
affected how the xmlns: declarations were translated into attribute names and
prefixes available via the DOM. That is, given the following markup:
----------------------------------------------------------
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<title>An HTML5 Document</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1>Example</h1>
<p id="p1" xmlns:foo="http://example.org/foo#">
This is an example HTML5 document.
</p>
<p id="end">The end.
</p>
<script type="text/javascript">
var p1 = document.getElementById("p1");
var end = document.getElementById("end");
var attrs = p1.attributes;
for(var i = attrs.length - 1; i >= 0; i--)
{
var p = document.createElement("p");
p.innerHTML = "prefix: " + attrs[i].prefix + ", " +
attrs[i].name + " = " + attrs[i].value;
document.body.insertBefore(p, end);
}
</script>
</body>
</html>
----------------------------------------------------------
The page above being loaded into an HTML5-capable browser would display this in
the page somewhere:
prefix = null, xmlns:foo = http://example.org/foo#
I was under the impression that an XHTML-capable browser executing similar
code:
----------------------------------------------------------
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<title>An XHTML1 Document</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1>Example</h1>
<p id="p1" xmlns:foo="http://example.org/foo#">
This is an example XHTML1 document.
</p>
<p id="end">The end.
</p>
<script type="text/javascript">
var p1 = document.getElementById("p1");
var end = document.getElementById("end");
var attrs = p1.attributes;
for(var i = attrs.length - 1; i >= 0; i--)
{
var p = document.createElement("p");
p.innerHTML = "prefix: " + attrs[i].prefix + ", " +
attrs[i].name + " = " + attrs[i].value;
document.body.insertBefore(p, end);
}
</script>
</body>
</html>
----------------------------------------------------------
would have produced this:
prefix = xmlns, foo = http://example.org/foo#
but instead, it produces this:
prefix: xmlns, xmlns:foo = http://example.org/foo#
I could have sworn that I ran this test when Henri first raised it two years
ago and I got different results at that time. Previously, I had stated:
I don't necessarily care how this is done as long as the Javascript that is
executed on the document, intended to find "xmlns:*" mappings, doesn't have to
have two code paths depending on if the document is in HTML5-mode or
XHTML5-mode.
After re-running the tests above, I'm convinced that two code paths for finding
all "xmlns:*" values are not necessary.
Apologies for the confusion, I'm marking the issue as INVALID, and setting it's
state to CLOSED.
--
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 Saturday, 4 December 2010 22:40:35 UTC