Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Incubation: patching (interleaved out-of-order streaming) (Issue #1134) from Dan Clark on 2026-04-01 (public-webapps-github@w3.org from April 2026)

From: Dan Clark <notifications@github.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2026 17:27:04 -0700
To: w3ctag/design-reviews <design-reviews@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1134/4166574874@github.com>

dandclark left a comment (w3ctag/design-reviews#1134)

Thanks @noamr, this is helpful in understanding the context for the switch to ProcessingInstructions.

Given the added complexity of this approach it'd be great if the explainer could do more to justify it vs `contentmethod`. Particulary helpful would be to include examples of patching scenarios that are:
- Hard or impossible to do with `contentmethod`,
- Easier or at least less hard with ProcessingInstructions, and
- Important for developers (e.g. is patching `<title>` or replacing a range of `<meta>` tags in `<head>` really a common use case)?

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1134#issuecomment-4166574874
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1134/4166574874@github.com>

Received on Wednesday, 1 April 2026 00:27:08 UTC