[Webkit-unassigned] [Bug 19122] New: XMLHttpRequest should use a more reasonable method to serialize documents
bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org
bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org
Sun May 18 22:19:06 PDT 2008
http://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19122
Summary: XMLHttpRequest should use a more reasonable method to
serialize documents
Product: WebKit
Version: 526+ (Nightly build)
Platform: All
URL: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-
webapi/2008May/0294.html
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: Normal
Priority: P2
Component: XML
AssignedTo: webkit-unassigned at lists.webkit.org
ReportedBy: ap at webkit.org
>From the bug URL:
---------------------------
var doc = document.implementation.createDocument("", "", null);
var el = doc.createElementNS("ns1", "x:y");
el.setAttributeNS("ns2", "x:z", "val");
doc.appendChild(el);
var xhr = new XMLHttpRequest();
xhr.open("POST", "echo.cgi", false);
xhr.send(doc);
alert(xhr.responseText);
Here echo.cgi is the following CGI:
#!/usr/bin/perl
print "Content-Type: text/plain\n\n";
while (<>) {
print;
}
Here are the results I see:
Firefox 3rc1:
<x:y xmlns:x="ns1" a0:z="val" xmlns:a0="ns2"/>
Opera 9.25:
<?xml version="1.0"?><x:y x:z="val" xmlns:x="ns1"/>
Safari 3.1:
<x:y x:z="val" />
Ignoring the Safari serialization, which is not in fact ns-wellformed no matter
how you slice it, the other two are ns-wellformed XML. Neither one roundtrips
to quite the original document. Which one is "correct" per the current spec?
Or is it neither one? Should an exception have been thrown in this case? Why
or why not? If there shouldn't have been an exception in this case, how is a
UA
to determine that?
---------------------------
JSXMLHttpRequest uses Document::toString(), which is a weird method, see also:
bug 18421.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.webkit.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
More information about the webkit-unassigned
mailing list