- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 19:35:53 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- CC: "Web API WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>
Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > Jonas already mentioned it in another e-mail and this feature was indeed > planned (by me 8-)) for XMLHttpRequest level 2. responseText already > follows text/html rules for encoding detection etc. but for parsing we > probably need to state that it needs to run with support for scripting > disabled which affects how <noscript> is parsed etc. I'm wondering if we > should do it like that or have scripts not run and parse <noscript> as > if scripting was enabled. (I'm not sure whether HTML 5 has an option for > the latter, but that's for instance how html5lib currently works.) > > Any opinions on this? Anything else I should pay attention too when > adding this feature? I can't say I feel very strongly about it. But it seems more logical to me to parse the contents of <noscript> as if scripts were disabled. Other things that should be disabled is loading stylesheets (which can affect .getComputerStyle and XBL bindings), onclick-like attributes and loading of plugins. This is in reality an issue even in XHR 1 due to XHTML. / Jonas
Received on Sunday, 29 July 2007 02:36:59 UTC