[whatwg] Test suite: Embedded content

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?

Badly.

<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.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'