W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > August 2006

RE: [SVGMobile12] Question on details of when <script> elements execute

From: Doug Schepers <doug.schepers@vectoreal.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 04:32:07 -0400
To: "'Boris Zbarsky'" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: "'Chris Lilley'" <chris@w3.org>, <www-svg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20060811083212.4BC794B945@postalmail-a3.dreamhost.com>

Hi, Boris-

Thanks for your reply.  I'm not trying to irritate you, I'm just trying to
reach the best possible resolution.

Boris Zbarsky wrote:
| Doug Schepers wrote:
| > "Altering the xlink:href on a script element in the DOM 
| tree has no effect;"
| > might be more accurately (if clumsily) worded as, "Altering 
| the xlink:href
| > on a script element in the DOM tree after the existing 
| resource has been
| > loaded and placed in the scripting context has no effect;"
| > 
| > If you change the href before the external resource has 
| been loaded and
| > placed in the scripting context, then the *new* resource is 
| loaded instead.
| > It is only immutable after the resource is loaded into the scripting
| > context.
| That's not compatible with HTML UA handling of <html:script>, 

In what way is it not compatible?  I'm sure that if HTML has a consistent,
cross-browser processing model, that we can define ours to match it.  I did
test this, and this processing model seemed to match that of the UAs I
tried.  Perhaps my methodology was flawed.

As far as I can tell, though, there is no specified processing behavior, so
we are trying to define it, as has been requested.  We don't want to be
incompatible with the HTML model, though, so details would help greatly.

| but at least it's well-defined, I think.
| > Does this resolve your issue? 
| I've lost track of the multiple diffs involved here, and 
| frankly have trouble 
| bringing myself to care enough to try to reconstruct the 
| current text.  So I 
| don't know.  If you all don't care much about compat with the 
| HTML script processing model, it probably does.

We do care about compatibility with HTML's behavior here.  If you or anyone
else can offer a better processing model, or critiques of this one, we
welcome the input.  I really don't think this is an insurmountable issue.

Received on Friday, 11 August 2006 08:32:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:54:14 UTC