www-dom vs public-webapps WAS: [DOM4] Mutation algorithm imposed order on document children

This confusion seems to come up a lot since DOM is part of public-webapps
but uses a separate mailing list. Maybe it's time to reconsider that
decision? It's the editors of the specs who have the largest say here IMO.

Travis, Jacob, Ms2ger, Aryeh, Anne: How would feel about merging DOM
discussions back into public-webapps@?

Ojan

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 5:15 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>wrote:

> Elliott, All - please use the www-dom@w3.org list for DOM4 discussions <
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/www-dom/<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/>
> >.
>
> (Elliott, since that spec is still in the draft phase, you should probably
> use the latest Editor's Draft <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/**
> domcore/raw-file/tip/Overview.**html<http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/domcore/raw-file/tip/Overview.html>>
> instead of the version in w3.org/TR/)
>
> -Thanks, AB
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject:        [DOM4] Mutation algorithm imposed order on document
> children
> Resent-Date:    Tue, 12 Jun 2012 01:01:51 +0000
> Resent-From:    <public-webapps@w3.org>
> Date:   Mon, 11 Jun 2012 16:39:36 -0700
> From:   ext Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>
> To:     <public-webapps@w3.org>
>
>
>
> I'm working on places where Webkit doesn't follow the DOM4 mutation
> algorithm and one of the bugs is not throwing an exception when a doctype
> node is inserted after an element in a document (or other permutations of
> the same situation).
>
> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_**bug.cgi?id=88682<https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=88682>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/domcore/#**mutation-algorithms<http://www.w3.org/TR/domcore/#mutation-algorithms>
>
> After discussing this with some other contributors there were questions on
> why we're enforcing the order of the document child nodes. Specifically
> since inserting a doctype node doesn't actually change the doctype so this
> situation is very unlikely (possibly never happens) in the wild. Not
> implementing this keeps the code simpler for a case that developers likely
> never see.
>
> Can we leave the behavior when your document is out of order unspecified?
>
> - Elliott
>
>