- From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 16:01:45 -0700
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: "Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu" <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>, WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
Received on Monday, 16 January 2012 23:02:42 UTC
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: > >> It is pretty clear to me that a conforming implementation of the above >> will not (or should not) permit e.textContent="\ud834" to complete >> without throwing some exception, at least without willfully violating >> these conformance requirements. >> > > "\ud834" could perhaps throw an exception in ES, though you should check > the actual processing model defined for \u escapes to make sure. > > But if it does NOT, then what you have on the right-hand side of that > assignment is an array of 16-bit integers, not a Unicode string. And what > happens on assignment is defined by the DOM spec, which likewise doesn't > refer to Unicode strings (DOMString is defined to be an array of arbitrary > 16-bit integers, just like ES strings). > > > If DOM-4 does not make this clear, then perhaps it should. >> > > This would be a behavior change from existing UAs that would break the > web, as far as I can see. It's certainly not how the DOM has worked so far. > > If you do want such a spec change, go for it, but I doubt UAs can do this. > See "break the web". Ah, we're at the "you're going to break the web" part of this interchange...
Received on Monday, 16 January 2012 23:02:42 UTC