On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 22:03:42 +0200, Ian Hickson <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 13 Apr 2010, Julien Royer wrote:
I don't understand the restrictions defined for the content of script
elements:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/semantics.html#restrictions-for-contents-of-script-elements
script being a raw-text element, it can't contain the "script-end"
production
(http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/syntax.html#cdata-rcdata-restrictions).
Why do we need such a complex ABNF for the content of script elements?
Unfortunately for historical reasons the parsing rules for <script>
blocks
are really obscure and can lead to some really strange results. For
example:
"<script><script></script>" closes at the </script>
"<script><!--</script>" closes at the </script>
"<script><!--<script></script></script>" closes at the _second_
</script>
Since we're basically stuck living with these silly rules (they're needed
to parse legacy documents), we have the complex ABNF you refer to to
prevent authors from trying to write stuff that doesn't work right.
But the rule for raw text elements in #writing already bans the third
example, because it contains "</script>".
If we want to make "<script><!--<script></script>--></script>" conforming,
then script shouldn't be a raw text element in #writing.
--
Simon Pieters
Opera Software
