- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 10:14:19 +1100
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, www-svg@w3.org
Jonas Sicking: > So the question is, how common do we think this is? We're looking for > how common it is that: > 1) An SVG file contains inline <style>, *and* > 2) That style does not use <![CDATA[]]> for the contents of the > element, *and* > 3) The contents uses entities. I think this will be very rare. > For markup that uses <![CDATA[]]> I believe we can ensure that the > markup will work correctly even in text/html, as detailed in my > proposal at [1]. If this is what we do, then I think the tokenizer should do something like s/^(\s*)<!\[CDATA\[(.*)\]\]>(\s*)$/\1\2\3/ since I’ve seeen content that is indented something like this: <script> <![CDATA[ blah(); ]]> </script> > This is the exact same issue as we have talked about regarding > <script>. It did seem like the majority thought that the above three > conditions were not common enough to be a cause for concern for > <script>. I think there would be more <script>s with entities than <style>s, and that I don’t mind making <script>for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) f();</script> not work in SVG-in-text/html. Given the desire in the SVG WG to have parse errors for things which create difficulty when copying content out to SVG/XML, would consistency dictate that the following SVG-in-text/html fragment be a parse error too?: <script>for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) f();</script> Also, I wonder whether we can unify the DOM, too, for <script> and <style>. Would the above <script> element in foreign content be an HTMLScriptElement or an SVGScriptElement? Could we have the DOM node for <script> implement both HTMLScriptElement and SVGScriptElement? Does it make sense to do this? -- Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Wednesday, 18 March 2009 23:15:09 UTC