On 29 Apr 2017, at 10:22, Hussein Shafie wrote:
This change will probably not happen before we officially support
(X)HTML 5.1. (For now, we don't support (X)HTML 5.1, just (X)HTML
5.0.)
XXe currently breaks HTML 5.0 and HTML 5.1 equally much: HTML 5.1
adds a
code example which I could not find in HTML 5.0. However, being an
example, it doesn’t impact the implementation requirements. Thus
you
cannot really justify postponing to deal with this issue by pointing
to
lack of support for HTML 5.1. ;-)
Question: What do you think about the XML document production
requirement? Does it make sense? I ask because I am considering
filing a
bug report against the HTML specification. Can you think of any
current
XML parser where it makes sense? Thanks.
If iframe/@src may point to anything accepted by a Web browser no
matter whether the document containing the iframe is HTML or XHTML,
then the value of iframe/@srcdoc should also be anything accepted by a
Web browser.
Good point.
I don't know if what I'm saying is correct or not. Anyway, this
feature is very far from the core of our business (XMLmind XML
Editor). We have already spend too much time on this issue.
I now confirm that we'll completely remove all the checkings made on
the value of @srcdoc, no matter of what says the (X)HTML spec.
Makes sense. As for ’more authoritative spec’: in the WHATWG version
of the HTML specification, there is no mention of the XML 'document
production'. Instead they point out that «The above requirements apply
in XML documents as well.»,
https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/embedded-content.html#the-iframe-element:xml-documents.
Leif Halvard Silli
--
XMLmind XML Editor Support List
xmleditor-support@xmlmind.com
http://www.xmlmind.com/mailman/listinfo/xmleditor-support
