I believe so. I don't see any harm. Personally, I think if you don't have a <head>, your page is broken, since you don't even get a <title>, but it would be nice to either throw an informative exception, or inject a head in this circumstance. -Ray
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Ray Ryan <rj...@google.com> wrote: > Can we add safely add head if we don't find it? > > > On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 2:43 PM, <cromwell...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/15803/diff/4001/4004 >> File user/src/com/google/gwt/dom/client/StyleInjector.java (right): >> >> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/15803/diff/4001/4004#newcode35 >> Line 35: "head").getItem(0)); >> I mentioned this in another review, but this common idiom can fail if >> the user doesn't have a <head> element, which is certainly legal. Some >> browsers automatically insert a <head> if it's missing, but some don't. >> I guess we could simply declare we don't support leaving out head. >> >> Might be good to assert head != null >> >> >> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/15803 >> > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
