Re: [whatwg] Question on Limits in Adaption Agency Algorithm

2013-08-02 Thread Yasuhiko Minamide
On Mon, 1 Jul 2013, Ian Hickson wrote: One option would be to remove from the stack of open elements any elements that we are skipping when we bail out of the AAA. Can anyone see a problem with doing that? I think that this solves the issue and clarifies the behaviour of the parser.

Re: [whatwg] Question on Limits in Adaption Agency Algorithm

2013-08-02 Thread Ian Hickson
On Fri, 2 Aug 2013, Yasuhiko Minamide wrote: On Mon, 1 Jul 2013, Ian Hickson wrote: One option would be to remove from the stack of open elements any elements that we are skipping when we bail out of the AAA. Can anyone see a problem with doing that? I think that this solves the

Re: [whatwg] Question on Limits in Adaption Agency Algorithm

2013-07-31 Thread Ian Hickson
On Mon, 1 Jul 2013, Ian Hickson wrote: One option would be to remove from the stack of open elements any elements that we are skipping when we bail out of the AAA. Can anyone see a problem with doing that? Since nobody raised any problems with this, I've now done this. For background,

Re: [whatwg] Question on Limits in Adaption Agency Algorithm

2013-07-01 Thread Ian Hickson
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012, Yasuhiko Minamide wrote: This is about Adaption Agency Algorithm in 12.2.5.4.7 The in body insertion mode. Limits of loops in the adoption agency algorithm were introduced in http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=5641to=5642. However, the limit for the inner

Re: [whatwg] Question on Limits in Adaption Agency Algorithm

2012-12-17 Thread Yasuhiko Minamide
xyz is inserted as a child of i and the order between abc and xyz is reversed in the tree. We would like to know whether this is an intended behaviour of the specification. Yeah that's definitely not intentional. Does anyone have any preference for how this is fixed? The easiest

Re: [whatwg] Question on Limits in Adaption Agency Algorithm

2012-12-12 Thread Henri Sivonen
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 11:05 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote: the order between abc and xyz is reversed in the tree. Does anyone have any preference for how this is fixed? Does it need to be fixed? That is, is it breaking real sites? -- Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi

Re: [whatwg] Question on Limits in Adaption Agency Algorithm

2012-12-12 Thread Ian Hickson
On Wed, 12 Dec 2012, Henri Sivonen wrote: On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 11:05 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote: the order between abc and xyz is reversed in the tree. Does anyone have any preference for how this is fixed? Does it need to be fixed? That is, is it breaking real sites? It

Re: [whatwg] Question on Limits in Adaption Agency Algorithm

2012-12-12 Thread James Graham
On Wed, 12 Dec 2012, Ian Hickson wrote: On Wed, 12 Dec 2012, Henri Sivonen wrote: On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 11:05 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote: the order between abc and xyz is reversed in the tree. Does anyone have any preference for how this is fixed? Does it need to be fixed? That

Re: [whatwg] Question on Limits in Adaption Agency Algorithm

2012-12-08 Thread Ian Hickson
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012, Yasuhiko Minamide wrote: This is about Adaption Agency Algorithm in 12.2.5.4.7 The in body insertion mode. Limits of loops in the adoption agency algorithm were introduced in http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=5641to=5642. However, the limit for the inner

Re: [whatwg] Question on Limits in Adaption Agency Algorithm

2012-11-04 Thread Yasuhiko Minamide
The DOM you get when you hit the limits in the adoption agency algorithm don't make a lot of intuitive sense. Unfortunately, the limits are necessary so that implementations don't end up having to do quadratic work. If this behavior is causing you trouble, you might I'm wondering whether

[whatwg] Question on Limits in Adaption Agency Algorithm

2012-11-02 Thread Yasuhiko Minamide
This is about Adaption Agency Algorithm in 12.2.5.4.7 The in body insertion mode. Limits of loops in the adoption agency algorithm were introduced in http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=5641to=5642. However, the limit for the inner loop introduces an unexpected behaviour for the