- From: David Mott <mott@nc.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 16:50:56 -0500 (EST)
- To: www-dom@w3.org
- CC: "mott@nc.com" <mott@nc.com>, Alan Kaiser <alan@navio.com>
Vidur,
I have not seen any document describe a common way to normalize HTML
that is poorly formed w.r.t. the DOM. This seems important if all DHTML
clients are to respond to JavaScript in the same way.
For instance,
<p><b>one <i>two </b>three </i> four</p>
does not produce a valid DOM tree. I can see two ways of representing
this:
<p>
|
-------------------------
| | |
<b> <i> four
| |
----- three
| |
one <i>
|
two
This gives proper style inheritance, but JavaScript access to <i> will
not be correct unless <i> remembers it is in multiple parts of the tree.
On the other hand:
<p>
|
-------------------------
| |
<b> four
|
---------
| |
one <i>
|
---------------
| | |
two </b> three
Gives proper style inheritance and proper JavaScript access, but results
in nodes under <b> that aren't really bold, and introduces end-tags to
the hierarchy, as well as bounding box calculation complexities.
Is this a question for the DOM working group? Do all clients need to
build a normalized DOM tree the same way? Or should clients do whatever
they think makes most sense, as long as the JavaScript behavior is the
same? Thst is, getting the inner/outer text works as expected, changing
the text color works as expected, etc.
David
--
David Mott, Network Computer Inc.
mott@nc.com http://www.nc.com
Received on Tuesday, 13 January 1998 14:55:01 UTC