Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Editorial updates to attribute reflection and enumerated attributes #7956
Editorial updates to attribute reflection and enumerated attributes #7956
Changes from 2 commits
f8e7dd4
9a660de
5760983
be10a81
cf744a4
da0cf8f
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Use "no state" here for consistency with the other algorithm?
What is a state with no associated keyword value? Is that "no state" due to lack of an invalid value default?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wonder if we should get rid of the "no state" state, and require invalid value default and missing value default for all enumerated attributes. I think it would make things simpler and less confusing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, it's something like the inherit state for contenteditable
I was thinking of that. It would amount to introducing a lot of individual "default" states for a few attributes. In particular for:
dir=""
,<link as="">
,<meta http-equiv="">
,formmethod=""
/formenctype=""
,inputmode=""
, andenterkeyhint=""
. It's probably a clarity improvement but it's also a good bit of work.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK. Considering the risk of introducing bugs, maybe it's not worth it, and it's sufficiently clear with this PR?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
contenteditable
isn't limited to only known values though. I'm not entirely convinced we ever hit this branch looking through the callers, but we could leave it as follow-up.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You're right about
contenteditable
. I thinkdir=""
hits this branch though. It is limited to only known values, and has no invalid value default or missing value default, so if it's just omitted then it will end up in the "not in any state" case, and return the empty string. http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?saved=10361