[whatwg] Test suite: Embedded content
ian at hixie.ch
Tue Jun 5 22:32:17 PDT 2007
On Tue, 29 Nov 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
> > At least in Gecko, we parse the contents of <noembed>, <noscript>,
> > <noframes>, and <iframe> as CDATA when we're not going to be using
> > their contents because in the past, we've had lots of problems with
> > authors treating these tags like C's preprocessor directives, handling
> > cases like:
> > <head><noscript><body>...</noscript><script>...</script><body> is
> > extremely difficult (and then preserving round-tripping for editor
> > gets to be a problem, and the list of problems goes on).
> Ok, but how is equivalent markup handled in XHTML, where parsing
> obviously can't switch to CDATA?
<noembed> is non-conforming and does nothing in XHTML.
<noscript> is non-conforming in XHTML and does nothing in XHTML.
<noframes> might be non-conforming. I haven't done anything with it yet.
<iframe> contents are non-conforming in XHTML. They would be hidden but
are in the DOM and active.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg