- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 15:13:31 +0300
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Rafael Weinstein <rafaelw@google.com>, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>, Erik Arvidsson <arv@google.com>, Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com>
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > Just saying that querySelector/All doesn't match elements in a > template (unless the scope is inside the template already) would work, > but it means that we have to make sure that all future similar APIs > also pay attention to this. I think that would be preferable compared to opening the Pandora's box of breaking the correspondence between the markup of the DOM tree. Besides, we'd need something like this for the XML case anyway if the position the spec takes is that it shies away from changing the correspondence between XML source and the DOM. In general, I think the willingness to break the correspondence between the source and the DOM should be the same for both HTML and XML serializations. If you believe that it's not legitimate to break the correspondence between XML source and the DOM, it would be logical to treat radical changes to the correspondence between HTML source and the DOM as equally suspect. I worry that if we take the position here that it's okay to change your correspondence between the source and the DOM in order to optimize for a real or perceived need, it will open the floodgates for all sorts of arguments that we can make the parser generate whatever data structures regardless of what the input looks like and we'll end up in a world of pain. It's bad enough that isindex is a parser macro. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Monday, 11 June 2012 12:14:56 UTC