Re: [whatwg/dom] Define processing instruction attributes (PR #1454)

@annevk commented on this pull request.



> +<div algorithm>
+<p>To <dfn>update attributes from data</dfn> for a {{ProcessingInstruction}} <a for=/>node</a>
+<var>pi</var>:
+
+<ol>
+ <li><p><a for=map>Clear</a> <var>pi</var>'s <a for=ProcessingInstruction>attribute map</a>.
+
+ <li><p>Let <var>context</var> be the result of <a>creating an element</a> given
+ <var>pi</var>'s <a>node document</a>, "<code>html</code>", and the <a>HTML namespace</a>.
+
+ <li><p>Let <var>markup</var> be the concatentation of "<code>&lt;attrs </code>",
+ <var>pi</var>'s <a for=CharacterData>data</a>, and
+ "<code>&gt;&lt;/attrs&gt;</code>".
+
+ <li><p>Let <var>fragment</var> be the result of invoking the
+ <a>fragment parsing algorithm steps</a> with <var>context</var> and <var>markup</var>.

Well we are extending what processing instructions can do so I think we should do that consistently across the syntaxes. Having subtle differences depending on how you got your processing instruction or what document it is currently in is not great, even if there is some precedent with other nodes.

I don't think people will be upset that browsers support some new ways to spell `xml-stylesheet` pseudo-attributes. XSLT removal is the significant change there.

And `document.createElement()` is rather terrible for its lowercasing as well by the way. That behavior has costed us all a lot of time trying to get it right and nail it down.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/dom/pull/1454#discussion_r2910969353
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <whatwg/dom/pull/1454/review/3921555210@github.com>