[whatwg] Namespaces and tag names in the HTML parser
ian at hixie.ch
Fri Sep 13 12:20:57 PDT 2013
On Thu, 1 Aug 2013, Peter Occil wrote:
> Many of these cases occur in the normative portion of the tree
> construction stage. Most of them involve checking whether an element
> (as opposed to a tag token) has a certain name:
> Accordingly, these cases are ambiguous:
> * If foster parenting is enabled and target is a table, tbody, tfoot,
> thead, or tr element
> * Let last template be the last template element in the stack of open
> elements, if any.
> * Pop elements from the stack of open elements until a template element
> has been popped from the stack.
> * If there is a template element on the stack of open elements, ignore
> the token.
> * If the second element on the stack of open elements is not a body
> element, [...] or if there is a template element on the stack of open
> elements, then ignore the token.
All of these hyperlink to the definition of the element and that
definition is of an element in the HTML namespace, as the spec says:
# Except where otherwise stated, all elements defined or mentioned in this
# specification are in the HTML namespace ("http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml")
: For example, button elements are elements with the element type button,
: meaning they have the local name "button" and (implicitly as defined
: above) the HTML namespace.
Why do you think the cases above are ambigious, but the following, for
instance, are not?
# The section element represents a generic section of a document or
# If the target of the click event is an img element [...]
# A form control is disabled if its disabled attribute is set, or if it is
# a descendant of a fieldset element whose disabled attribute is set and
# is not a descendant of that fieldset element's first legend element
# child, if any.
> Moreover, where needed, a shortcut is to use "an HTML so-and-so element"
> rather than "a so-and-so element in the HTML namespace". (This can
> apply similarly to SVG and MathML.)
I don't understand why this is necessary. I think it would be misleading
because it would make authors question why other parts of the spec don't
specify the namespace.
I've added a redundant note to the parser intro about this, but it's
redundant -- it just references the terminology section and repeats the
same point again.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg