- From: Michael A. Puls II <shadow2531@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 20:44:36 -0400
- To: www-dom@w3.org
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 05:13:21 -0400, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote: > Hi, Daniel- > > I agree with Robin that the text seems clear, and that the string > "<e/>" doesn't contain markup... in fact, it's specifically > escaped so that the UA doesn't misinterpret it as markup. > > However, if you still think it's ambiguous, the most productive way > forward is not to present arguments, but to propose alternate wording. "Similarly, on setting, no parsing is performed either, the input string is taken as pure textual content." Why not take that as an example and use: "On getting, no serialization is performed, the returned string contains pure textual content." ? That would get rid of 'markup', which I don't think should have even been brought up in the first place. If you are going to mention 'markup', I think it'd be good to say that the returned string doesn't contain markup in the innerHTML sense. But, is mention 'markup' actually necessary? Shouldn't "No serialization is performed" be enough? Also, the setting and getting descriptions are all lumped and intermixed into that paragraph. I'd much prefer: On setting: Setting description On getting: Getting description. -- Michael
Received on Tuesday, 29 June 2010 00:45:12 UTC