Re: [whatwg] Why are we merging Document and HTMLDocument again?

On Sep 12, 2013, at 2:00 PM, Ian Hickson <> wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Sep 2013, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>> On Sep 12, 2013, at 11:43 AM, Ian Hickson <> wrote:
>>> So you also support having a Document descendant that is used for 
>>> Documents that have global scopes / browsing contexts / the works, and 
>>> one that is used for Documents that don't (e.g. createDocument(), 
>>> XHR), where the former has the named getter and the latter doesn't?
>> I think that's what I'm suggesting except that I'm suggesting to keep 
>> calling the former HTMLDocument.
>> As far as I checked, SVGDocument and alike don't have named getter 
>> either so I'd rather not introduce it any non-HTML document.
> What's an "HTML document" in this world? Something served using text/html? 
> Something with a browsing context? Some combination thereof?

I'm not trying to invent anything new here. HTMLDocument as existed before the merge.

> SVGDocument is supposed to be merged into Document as well. The idea is to 
> not have any descendants of Document. The reason is that you can have 
> compound documents that need both the SVG and HTML (and MathML and FooML) 
> methods. There's no such thing as "non-HTML documents" now. Documents can 
> have SVG and HTML and mix it at will.

That's okay but there's no point in bringing in legacy features like named property in that new world.

Named properties impos a significant runtime cost, and we'd like to get rid of them as much as possible.
As such, I'm strongly opposed to supporting it in more places.

- R. Niwa

Received on Friday, 13 September 2013 01:53:04 UTC