- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 07:10:17 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9659 --- Comment #22 from Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> 2010-10-01 07:10:14 UTC --- (In reply to comment #21) > We used to have a two-step tree constructor with basically two sets of > branches, and it was not very clear. Why would we reintroduce it? Conceptually, we want stuff to behave as if we were in the foreign lands if the current node is not an HTML node and the current node is not one of the special nodes that take HTML children. It's weird not to have this conceptual model map one-to-one to spec text and to have the spec instead manage the "in foreign content" insertion mode--often with bugs so that it's not actually one-to-one to the conceptual model. > I really > don't understand why you think that would be clearer. > > The current model is nice and clear, IMHO: it treats foreign content in a > manner analogous to table content or <select> content. What's the problem? The bugs around <svg></svg><![CDATA[foo]]> and <svg><foreignObject><div><![CDATA[foo]]></div></foreignObject></svg> (or indeed U+0000 in place of CDATA!) show that the current model of having "in foreign" as a mode (as opposed to being a special case before switching on mode) is not nice and clear. -- 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 Friday, 1 October 2010 07:10:21 UTC