W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: Please don't shout or throw things at this respec newbie

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 19:29:35 +0200
To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
Cc: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, spec-prod@frink.w3.org, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20130603192935884976.eb41af54@xn--mlform-iua.no>
I have filed a bug for this, 3 moths ago: 

Citing myself from that bug: ”There are 5 instances of document.write 
in http://darobin.github.com/respec/builds/respec-w3c-common.js”

There first one is: 

	i.document.write(t), i.document.close(), i.document.form.submit()

Leif H Silli

Marcos Caceres, Mon, 3 Jun 2013 17:37:00 +0100:

> On Monday, June 3, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:
>> Note that this does *not* prevent you from creating your documents as
>> XHTML, editing them with XML tools, etc. It's only a problem if they
>> then get served as such. Is that an issue?
>> If it is a problem, I can try to dig to see if there's a workaround for
>> you. But I won't ever be able to make it work across the board, only
>> perhaps (and it's a big perhaps) for the basic features that you're
>> currently using. As far as I can tell at this point it would involve
>> patching jQuery to notice that it's being used in XHTML, or at least do
>> something that mucks with its internals.
> Yay for polyglot :) 
> The document in question is intended to be modified/updated by the 
> community (through pull requests), so for the benefit of the wider 
> community, I would urge you to leave it as HTML. Apart from making a 
> particular text editor happy, is there some other use case for having 
> it as XML (that can't be handled by automatically converting the 
> document to XHTML through post processing)?  
> -- 
> Marcos Caceres
Received on Monday, 3 June 2013 17:33:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:18 UTC