@Lasse Reichstein > The test checks whether the value set as innerHTML is the same as > the one read back afterwards. There is nothing that suggests that > this must be the case. The formatting of the values read from innerHTML > is not specified. E.g., if there is an element with multiple attributes, > they can come back in any order. The reason that it appears to work for > the other tests is probably that they are so simple that there is only > one format possible.
Correct, the test is kept simple to keep factors like attribute order out of it. > In the last case, the table test, the input syntax omits the start and > end tags of the mandatory tbody element (the element is mandatory, the > tags are not). > Reading innerHTML back shows the element, which is almost expectable. > > I'd say that this particular test doesn't show a problem with innerHTML, > apart from it not being fully specified. That might be the problem that > some people here are having, and other people don't concider that a > problem. Spec states "The TBODY start tag is always required *except* when the table contains only one table body and no table head or foot sections. The TBODY end tag may always be safely omitted." So, in this case the test was to set the table's innerHTML without a TBODY element. In browsers that allow this, like Safari 5, Chrome 6, & Opera 9.25, there is no TBODY element created. In other browsers like IE, Firefox, & Opera 9.5+ it creates a TBODY element. One group of browsers is wrong and it can cause problems for devs using innerHTML. @Jorge > What exactly did your safari do wrong wrt the colgroup ? Safari 5 throws a DOMException "NO_MODIFICATION_ALLOWED_ERR: DOM Exception 7" - JDD -- To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To search via a non-Google archive, visit here: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
