- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 07:52:58 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Cc: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Thu, 5 Jul 2007, Henri Sivonen wrote: > > For some elements the spec says: > > If the stack of open elements has an element in scope with the same tag name > > as that of the token, then generate implied end tags. > > > > Now, if the current node is not an element with the same tag name as that of > > the token, then this is a parse error. > > > > If the stack of open elements has an element in scope with the same tag name > > as that of the token, then pop elements from this stack until an element > > with that tag name has been popped from the stack. > > I can't figure out you one might get the stack in such a state that the > "generate implied end tags" step changed the situation so that the > second "If the stack of open elements has an element in scope" found a > different node than the first "If the stack of open elements has an > element in scope". > > Am I right? If yes, it would make sense to write this is a way that > doesn't suggest that implementors search the stack twice. Do you have any proposals for how to phrase it? -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 5 July 2007 07:53:07 UTC