- From: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 18:32:58 +0200
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 15:12:46 +0200, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen at iki.fi> wrote: >> One idea would be to update DOM Level 3 Core to make sure you can never >> get documents that are not serializable. I don't really know if that's >> feasible though. > > In that case, the HTML parsing section would need to be revised to > forbid element and attributes names that are not conforming XML 1.0 + > Namespaces local names, to forbid non-XML characters in character data > and attribute values and to forbid "--" in comments. Not really, as innerHTML works differently for HTML documents. > Personally, I'd welcome such a change, since it would truly make > text/html an alternative infoset serialization for a subset of XML 1.0. I suppose you mean Namespaces in XML 1.0? I guess that might be useful. > Non-browsers that use XML tools to process HTML5 will have to enforce > those constraints anyway in one way or another. Current text/html > browsers don't, though. > > Or did you mean that browsers would not enforce XML 1.0 serializability > if the DOM was created by parsing text/html? Would you then throw an > exception if a subtree is imported from such a DOM into a DOM that > enforces serializability? > > The exposure of CDATA sections in the DOM is, IMO, a design flaw in the > DOM. I wouldn't mind serializing them as normal character data. Yes, it would be really nice if we could drop the whole CDATA section thing from the DOM. Together with entities... -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Saturday, 28 October 2006 09:32:58 UTC