Re: [webcomponents] Should parser extensibility be a design goal? (#113)

Some thoughts...

* `script` parsing is insane. Really. See [pub quiz](https://twitter.com/zcorpan/status/202049236592893956), and the [correct answer](https://twitter.com/zcorpan/status/202156793277857794). Why would anyone want this wacko weirdness for any other element where it's not needed for Web compat?? If you want CDATA, be like `style`, not like `script`.
* Voidness might not be necessary if elements with a dash in them can be self-closed with `/>` syntax. (https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/721)
* `template`-like parsing means you don't get thrown out of a `table` and you can contain stuff like `tr`. It also means you're scoping; compare `<p><asdf>1</p>2` to `<p><template>1</p>2`.
* Most "new" HTML elements parse like `<asdf>` (e.g. `video`) or like `<address>` (e.g. `figure`). Parsing like `<asdf>` for "block-like" elements means omitting `</p>` tags doesn't really work (e.g. `<asdf><p>1<p>2</asdf>3`). (Already the case for `a`/`audio`/`video`/`ins`/`del` though.)

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/113#issuecomment-186690098