W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: [DOM4] Mutation algorithm imposed order on document children

From: Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@webkit.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 13:40:57 -0700
Message-ID: <CABNRm62yck6AvE8dpTB5fJf_QSwVGBKOF61Z-sLjwZuoJr5CfQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>
Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>, www-dom <www-dom@w3.org>
I see. And IE9 uses the doctype that has been inserted into an incorrect
place? If so, I would be interested in hearing why Microsoft decided to do

- Ryosuke
On Jun 12, 2012 1:35 PM, "Elliott Sprehn" <esprehn@gmail.com> wrote:

> IE9 _does_ expose the doctype node. It's IE8 that doesn't but I've ignored
> that case.
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@webkit.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Good question, I assume you mean new
>>> XMLSerializer().serializeToString(document)?
>>> FF: Correct order because it forces it on you.
>>> Webkit: Doctype printed out of order.
>>> IE9: Doctype always printed in order.
>>> Opera: Doesn't ever print the doctype. But is the only one to print the
>>> XML prolog.
>>> IE9's behavior seems the most sane here since it makes sure the
>>> serialization is valid in the face of developer error similar to
>>> serializing the parsed result of <b><a></b></a>.
>> However, it'll be odd if the order in which nodes appear in DOM and the
>> order in which they appear in the markup differ. From what you've described
>> so far, it's okay for IE9 to do this because it doesn't expose DocType
>> node. I'm not certain it makes sense for us to do the same in the world
>> where we expose DocType nodes.
>> - Ryosuke
Received on Tuesday, 12 June 2012 20:41:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:37:00 UTC