- From: Thomas Conway <conway@csse.unimelb.edu.au>
- Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2007 09:39:32 +1100
- To: keshlam@us.ibm.com
- Cc: www-dom@w3.org
On Tue, 2007-11-06 at 11:45 -0500, keshlam@us.ibm.com wrote:
> I believe this particular example falls in the class of errors that we
> decided to leave as quality-of-implementation issues. That is, it's up
> to each implementation to decide whether to guard the DOM application
> from making this mistake at the time it is done, or to detect it at
> serialization time, or to make it entirely the user's
> responsibility... and it's the app author's responsiblity to select an
> implementation which picks the trade-off which suits their needs,
> and/or to code appropriately to prevent the problem from arising.
Ah. That seems reasonable. I missed the DOM3 text that Bjoern Hoehrmann
quoted.
Putting the burden on the serializer seems a reasonable way to go, since
the serializer has to process every character in the comment at some
level or other.
Thanks for the prompt clarification!
Tom
--
You are beautiful; but learn to work,
Dr Thomas Conway for you cannot eat your beauty.
conway@csse.unimelb.edu.au -- Congolese proverb
Received on Tuesday, 6 November 2007 23:02:58 UTC