[whatwg] main element parsing behaviour
simonp at opera.com
Wed Nov 7 03:46:36 PST 2012
On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 11:40:57 +0100, Steve Faulkner
<faulkner.steve at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Anne,
> That feedback as stated was mainly for Hixie, who dismissed it.
> I have sought further opinion, but do not have the expertise to know
> what I
> need to do with it.
> for example, I get the sense that implementers in general do not want to
> mess with the parsing algorithm, so does that mean. I don't need to put
> anything in the spec?
I'm not convinced that we should freeze the parser now just because we
have reached interop. I think not changing the parser here makes <main>
(and other future elements; whatever we do here sets a precedent for
future elements) inconsistent with the rest of HTML. In the long term,
having <main> and <aside> parse differently just because we didn't want to
change the behavior from 2012-era browsers will seem silly. Moreover, it
will complicate the already complicated rules about when </p> may be
omitted (in terms of how people think of the rule), which means that we
might have to say that </p> is always required.
I'm also not convinced by Henri's assertion that <p> will not precede
<main> in conforming content. <p> is used for all sorts of things, not
just a paragraph of text.
More information about the whatwg