- From: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 19:38:55 +0200
- To: Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org>
- Cc: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAAK2GfEeKoSbJWmD7efL66XPjKmYFMmLMeqN0MjYdMHadffcrA@mail.gmail.com>
Florent, You got it right : the empty <b/> element is the only difference But there is two questions folded here : * Do we think there may be multiple allowed answer to such question ? * If so, then we should enhance the testsuite * If not, then we should choose which is the good one Mohamed On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org>wrote: > On 12 September 2012 15:29, Innovimax SARL wrote: > > Hi, > > > This base64 text > > [...] > > Into this HTML string > > [...] > > and then many XProc implementation agree on converting this to > > [...] > > HTML LIVE DOM says that it must be > > [...] > > Which would make Calabash be the only to answer correctly > > > How do we deal with this > > 1) We say Calabash is right and fix the test > > 2) We keep saying Calabash is wrong > > 3) We say Both are right and add a way to put it into the testsuite > > I am not sure to understand what the problem is. If I am right, the > base 64 part is not relevant, this is only about how the decoded, > ill-formed HTML markup is parsed into an XML document, right? > > Between the excerpt you've shown an the one on Live DOM, the only > difference I can spot is the extra whitespace-only text node in EM > around B. Is there anything else? > > Regards, > > -- > Florent Georges > http://fgeorges.org/ > http://h2oconsulting.be/ > -- Innovimax SARL Consulting, Training & XML Development 9, impasse des Orteaux 75020 Paris Tel : +33 9 52 475787 Fax : +33 1 4356 1746 http://www.innovimax.fr RCS Paris 488.018.631 SARL au capital de 10.000 €
Received on Wednesday, 12 September 2012 17:39:30 UTC