- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 07:27:09 +0000
- To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17976 Summary: xml-stylesheet with type=text/xsl needs to be handled explicitly Product: HTML WG Version: unspecified Platform: Other OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: other Hixie drafts (editor: Ian Hickson) AssignedTo: ian@hixie.ch ReportedBy: contributor@whatwg.org QAContact: contributor@whatwg.org CC: ian@hixie.ch, hsivonen@iki.fi, jirka@kosek.cz, mike@w3.org, julian.reschke@gmx.de, annevk@annevk.nl, public-xml-core-wg@w3.org, dbaron@dbaron.org This was was cloned from bug 14689 as part of operation convergence. Originally filed: 2011-11-03 19:02:00 +0000 Original reporter: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk> ================================================================================ #0 Henry S. Thompson 2011-11-03 19:02:01 +0000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Section 5.5.3 "Page load processing model for XML files" currently mentions xml-stylesheet only in connection with its interaction with the application cache. The XML Core WG requests that prose be added to cover the case where an xml-stylesheet PI is present, with type other than text/css, and in particular to handle the case where type='text/xsl' or type='application/xslt+xml' by invoking XSLT with the referenced stylesheet and starting the page load process over with the results, consistent with existing browser practice. The WG also suggests that it might be a good idea to cover the case where no stylesheet PI is present and the root element is not 'html', where existing practice is to produce a default indented tree view of the XML itself. ================================================================================ #1 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2011-11-03 23:15:13 +0000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What should the requirements be for the first case? The second case is already handled by the navigation algorithm as far as I can tell. ================================================================================ #2 Henry S. Thompson 2011-11-03 23:22:13 +0000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (In reply to comment #1) > What should the requirements be for the first case? I attempted to give them: invoke XSLT on the current Document with the referenced stylesheet, adopt the result as the current Document. There are signs you had already anticipated this, for example wrt the timing of <script> in the result, so I'm not sure what you're missing. . . > The second case is already handled by the navigation algorithm as far as I can > tell. Hmm, I tried to track it through the steps of that algorithm and it seemed to fall all the way through -- which clause do you think picks it up? ================================================================================ #3 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2011-11-11 20:05:19 +0000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (we spoke about this in person; the second issue will be split into a second bug, and for the first issue we need either some tests demonstrating exactly what is going on, or some proposed text. ================================================================================ #4 Henry S. Thompson 2011-11-22 13:51:33 +0000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Created attachment 1046 xml-stylesheet PI test cases A modest set of test cases illustrating existing browser behaviour in response to XML documents with xml-stylesheet processing instructions which reference XSLT stylesheets ================================================================================ #5 Henry S. Thompson 2011-11-22 13:57:06 +0000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note that the above test cases only cover _single_ xml-stylesheet PIs. There's rather a lot of variation in how _multiple_ PIs (of the same type) are handled, more tests will eventually be forthcoming wrt this issue. Preliminary investigation with type='text/css' suggests that Firefox and Opera implement the spec'd behaviour of offering user choice when the alternate="yes" pseudo-attribute is present, but Chrome and IE do not (at least, I haven't found a place where they make the offer, if there is one). ================================================================================ #6 Henry S. Thompson 2011-11-23 09:59:27 +0000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ah, I found it for IE -- at least IE9 -- I had failed to get the menu bar up, but once I did, the necessary controls are there under View > Style. ================================================================================ #7 Julian Reschke 2011-11-23 10:34:55 +0000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <http://greenbytes.de/tech/tc/httplink/> has a few test cases relevant to referencing the style sheet using the HTTP Link header fields (as opposed to the stylesheet PI); some of them should be relevant as well, such as support for the correct internet media types, and exposing the stylesheet title through the CSS object model. ================================================================================ #8 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2012-05-03 16:52:05 +0000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To resolve this we need a lot more tests, e.g. testing whether the handling of this PI is blocking (by putting a <script> element in the source and having an XSL sheet where the server blocks so it takes a few seconds to download), testing what happens when the XML file or the XSL file (or both) are malformed, testing what happens with various MIME types for the XSL file, testing all the various attributes (e.g. are alternative style sheets honoured? What happens with multiple XSL links?), testing what happens when using <link> elements rather than XML PIs, etc. ================================================================================ #9 Henri Sivonen 2012-05-14 08:32:20 +0000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FWIW, Firefox's behavior in this scenario is considered a bug. ================================================================================ -- Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2012 07:27:11 UTC