[whatwg] Tag Soup: Blocks-in-inlines
Lachlan Hunt
lachlan.hunt at lachy.id.au
Wed Jan 25 05:15:58 PST 2006
Simon Pieters wrote:
> Hi,
>
> From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt at lachy.id.au>
>> However, there may be a 5th option available. Consider this, using
>> the following markup samples from the article.
>>
>> 1.
>> <em><p>X</em>Y</p>
>>
>> BODY
>> + P
>> + EM
>> + #text: X
>> + #text: Y
>
> Why would you drop the first EM? Why should this be parsed any different
> than 4? I think it should look like this instead:
Because there were no text nodes between the <em> start-tag and the <p>
start tag, so putting it in there would be completely redundant and
useless. Although putting it there will have no detrimental effect
beyond wasting a minuscule amount of memory, so it really doesn't matter.
>> 2.
>> <em><p>XY</p></em>
>>
>> BODY
>> + P
>> + EM
>> + #text: X
>> + #text: Y
>
> Why are there two text nodes?
Copy & paste error.
> I don't think there's much advantage of differentiating between
> "well-formed" and "malformed" markup. They should be parsed the same to
> keep things simple and predictable. Thus, <em><p>XY</p></em> should be
> parsed as:
>
> BODY
> + EM
> + P
> + EM
> + #text: XY
>
> ...IMHO.
Agree; but again, the empty EM element is redundant.
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
More information about the whatwg
mailing list