Re: Document.createElement: null or HTML namespace?

On Tue, 07 Oct 2014 20:57:11 +0200, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 2014-10-07 at 08:54 -0700, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>> On 10/7/14, 6:52 AM, Paul Cotton wrote:
>> > Test results for this specification can be found at [4-5].  An  
>> analysis
>> > of the test results is available at [6].
>>
>> Sadly, I must object, due to lack of implementation experience for some
>> parts of this specification (as in, there are 0 implementations that
>> actually implement some parts of this).
>
> Thank you Boris for going into more details on the implementation
> experience.
>
>> Of most concern to me are these two items:
>>
>> 1) Are none of these tests specifically testing createElement on a
>> non-HTML document?
>
> I didn't find one indeed but will send a PR later today to fill the gap.
>
>> I believe the spec text there calls for an HTML element to be created,
>> which doesn't match any implementation (see
>> http://jsfiddle.net/003c04ew/1/ which alerts null in Safari, IE, Chrome,
>> and Firefox but per spec draft should be alerting the HTML namespace).
>
> Correct. I found this choice was discussed in:
>   https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19431
>
> The whiteboard field says "blocked on implementers weighing in".
>
> Looking at the Mozilla bug as well, it seems it's waiting on someone to
> just make the call:
>  https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=799937
>
> Given that no implementation are following the spec after 2 years, it
> seems it's time to revert the change.

Personally I would still prefer if the current spec was implemented.

I also think this should be bundled with the handling of Document vs.  
HTMLDocument etc and what createDocument(HTMLNS, 'html').contentType  
should return. Just changing the spec for createElement still means  
everyone has to change for Document.

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19431#c2

-- 
Simon Pieters
Opera Software

Received on Friday, 10 October 2014 07:34:45 UTC