- From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 14:00:30 -0800
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov at chromium.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Adam Barth <w3c at adambarth.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 1:29 PM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov at chromium.org> wrote: >>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov at chromium.org> wrote: >>>> Ah, that's a good question. This also must be specified. It should >>>> depend on the parent of the <content> element. If the parent is shadow >>>> root or <table>, then it should make <tr> the child of <content>. >>>> Otherwise, it should use foster parenting as usual. >>> >>> Oops, not "foster parenting", but "ignore" as you mentioned. Still >>> getting through the details of the parsing spec. >> >> There's also some subtly w.r.t. the pending character tokens. >> >> More generally, I think we'd all be much more sane if the HTML parsing >> algorithm was specified in the HTML living standard rather than >> modified ad-hoc in a number of different documents. > > That makes sense, but how will we handle the fact that the elements in > the algorithm aren't part of the HTML specification? Through the magic of legacy support, that's already the case today! (I'm looking at you <xmp>.) The parsing algorithm just says how to construct a DOM. You can have all sorts of crazy futuristic/obsolete elements in the DOM. Adam >>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa at webkit.org> wrote: >>>>> What if content wrapped elements ignored by the parser. e.g. >>>>> <content><tr>hi</tr></content> >>>>> >>>>> What should the content element include in that case? >>>>> >>>>> - Ryosuke >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 18, 2012 10:19 AM, "Dimitri Glazkov" <dglazkov at chromium.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> 'sup, Whatwg! >>>>>> >>>>>> The new HTML elements in the shadow DOM spec >>>>>> (http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/shadow/index.html) >>>>>> and the nascent HTML templates spec (see it all explained here: >>>>>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/explainer/index.html) >>>>>> require tweaking of the HTML parsing behavior -- mostly the tree >>>>>> construction bits. >>>>>> >>>>>> A typical example would be specifying an insertion point (that's >>>>>> <content> element) as child of a <table>: >>>>>> >>>>>> <table> >>>>>> ? ?<content> >>>>>> ? ? ? ?<tr> >>>>>> ? ? ? ? ? ?... >>>>>> ? ? ? ?</tr> >>>>>> ? ?</content> >>>>>> </table> >>>>>> >>>>>> Both <shadow> and <template> elements have similar use cases. >>>>>> >>>>>> What would be the sane way to document such changes to the HTML parser >>>>>> behavior? A list of modifications to tree construction modes in each >>>>>> respective spec? Some "generic insertion point element" clause in the >>>>>> HTML spec? Give me ideas. >>>>>> >>>>>> Also -- what are the side effects of such a change? Surely, there's >>>>>> something I am not thinking of. >>>>>> >>>>>> :DG<
Received on Wednesday, 18 January 2012 14:00:30 UTC