- 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