RESOLVED FIXED 41402
Implement HTML5 "in scope" algorithm and attempt to use it 
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41402
Summary Implement HTML5 "in scope" algorithm and attempt to use it
Eric Seidel (no email)
Reported 2010-06-30 04:10:38 PDT
Implement HTML5 "in scope" algorithm and attempt to use it
Attachments
Patch (8.14 KB, patch)
2010-06-30 04:14 PDT, Eric Seidel (no email) 		no flags
DetailsFormatted DiffDiff
Patch (9.70 KB, patch)
2010-06-30 04:43 PDT, Eric Seidel (no email) 		no flags
DetailsFormatted DiffDiff
Show Obsolete (1) View All Add attachment proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Eric Seidel (no email)
Comment 1 2010-06-30 04:14:14 PDT
Created attachment 60107 [details] Patch
Eric Seidel (no email)
Comment 2 2010-06-30 04:17:20 PDT
Comment on attachment 60107 [details] Patch Nevermind. This causes a test failure. I'll look at this more tomorrow.
Eric Seidel (no email)
Comment 3 2010-06-30 04:43:44 PDT
Created attachment 60109 [details] Patch
Adam Barth
Comment 4 2010-06-30 12:38:16 PDT
Comment on attachment 60109 [details] Patch WebCore/html/HTMLElementStack.cpp:36 + using namespace HTMLNames; Ah, i see you have it now :) WebCore/html/HTMLElementStack.cpp:186 + if (isMarker(element)) We might want to store these bits in the ElementRecord instead of testing each time, depending on how expensive these branches end up being.
WebKit Commit Bot
Comment 5 2010-06-30 13:03:03 PDT
Comment on attachment 60109 [details] Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 60109 Committed r62196: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/62196>
WebKit Commit Bot
Comment 6 2010-06-30 13:03:08 PDT
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 7 2010-06-30 13:09:47 PDT
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/62196 might have broken Qt Linux Release minimal
Eric Seidel (no email)
Comment 8 2010-06-30 13:36:24 PDT
(In reply to comment #4) > (From update of attachment 60109 [details]) > WebCore/html/HTMLElementStack.cpp:36 > + using namespace HTMLNames; > Ah, i see you have it now :) > > WebCore/html/HTMLElementStack.cpp:186 > + if (isMarker(element)) > We might want to store these bits in the ElementRecord instead of testing each time, depending on how expensive these branches end up being. I think that's an excellent idea!
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.