- From: Rafael Weinstein <rafaelw@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 12:01:08 +0300
- To: Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@webkit.org>
- Cc: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Scott González <scott.gonzalez@gmail.com>
Yehuda, Can you help clarify here whether jQuery's behavior is intentional (i.e. use cases drive the need for executability), or if it's a side-effect of the implementation? On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@webkit.org> wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote: >> >> On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 6:29 AM, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@webkit.org> wrote: >> > There appears to be a consensus to use document.parse (which is fine >> > with >> > me), so I would like to double-check which behavior we're picking. IMO, >> > the >> > only sane choice is to unset the already-started flag since doing >> > otherwise >> > implies script elements parsed by document.parse won't be executed when >> > inserted into a document. >> >> I was expecting document.parse() to make scripts unexecutable. Are >> there use cases for creating executable scripts using this facility? > > > jQuery appears to let script elements run: http://jsfiddle.net/kB8Fp/2/ > > Also, we're talking about using the same algorithm for template element. > I would like script elements inside my template to run. > > - Ryosuke >
Received on Friday, 8 June 2012 09:01:39 UTC