[whatwg] Editorial comment r/e summary element
ian at hixie.ch
Tue Sep 20 23:38:38 PDT 2011
On Wed, 21 Sep 2011, Sergiusz Wolicki wrote:
> I am reading:
> "Contexts in which this element can be used: As the first child of a
> My feeling is that unconnected DOM elements in a script are not really
> an HTML document but only its building blocks (bricks). Therefore, any
> parent-child relationship required by the spec does not apply until the
> fragments are connected together to form an HTML document to be
> interpreted (rendered) by a user agent. Therefore, if "if any" applies
> to fragments only and not to complete documents, then I feel, it should
> not be present in the spec.
The specification's requirements apply to all HTML elements, whether in a
document or not, whenever scripts are not executing. It also applies to
non-conforming documents (e.g. documents where the parent element of a
<summary> is not a <details>).
> The problem is that if we add "if any", allowing no parent, then we
> should also define what <summary> means if there is no parent.
The element doesn't mean anything when there's no parent, because if
there's no parent, or if the parent is not a <details> element, the only
line in the spec that says that the <summary> element represents anything
does not apply (because of the "if any").
> In short: "if any" should not be added if it is only meant to allow an
> element to be represented separately as DOM in a script, because, if I
> understand correctly, such representation is allowed for any HTML
If I just omit the "if any", then the specification's definition would
make no sense in the case where the <summary> element has no parent or its
parent is not a <details> element, as it would refer to an element that
does not exist.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg