- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:54:59 +0200
- To: public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com> wrote: > My thinking on this has evolved a bit since my original post. I wrote a > patch to the spec that creates a new "unknown context" insertion mode that, > in fact, only affects the problematic table case, and otherwise delegates to > the in-body insertion mode. > You can see it in full glory > at http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14694 > Please let me know if that doesn't clear it up for you :) What's your rationale for adding DWIM for those particular elements as opposed to adding DWIM for all elements? I don't want to add DWIM to support <html>, <frameset>, etc., but I'd like to have good confidence that the selection of elements that we add DWIM support for is the right set (neither too broad to drive up implementation cost without use cases nor too narrow to end up needing whack-a-mole tweaking later). -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Thursday, 10 November 2011 13:55:27 UTC