Re: The future of XML related technologies in Mozilla

Lucky wrote:
> Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> Ian Hickson wrote:
>>> On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>>>> OK, I sense a significant communications failure here.  Let's say we
>>>> have:
>>>>
>>>>   <div id="foo">Text</div>
>>>>
>>>> and script as follows:
>>>>
>>>>   var node = document.getElementById("foo");
>>>>   var str = (new DOMSerializer()).serializeToString(node);
>>>>   var str2 = node.innerHTML.
>>>>
>>>> Then str is the string:  '<div id="foo">Text</div>' while str2 is the
>>>> string:  'Text'
>>>>
>>>> To get the string in |str| using innerHTML, you would have to use the
>>>> code with importNode and company that I posted in my previous post.
>>>> This is why outerHTML exists, fwiw.
>>> Oh, I see what you're saying. I have no objection to introducing
>>> outerHTML as well. Currently I haven't done so mostly because Mozilla
>>> doesn't support it, so I assumed there wasn't strong demand for it.
>> The problem with outerHTML is that it makes sense to get, but is very
>> confusing to set. I.e setting outerHTML removes the current node from
>> the document so any additional operations on the node after that are
>> effectively no-ops. I.e. something like
>>
>> node = document.getElementById("foo");
>> node.outerHTML = "<ol><li>hi</li></ol>";
>> node.setAttribute("start", 5);
>>
>> won't do what many people would think it does. Of course, we could make
>> outerHTML readonly, but that'd be confusing because innerHTML is not,
>> and outerHTML is not in IE.
>>
>> / Jonas
> outerHTML is in IE?
> <http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/author/dhtml/reference/properties/outerhtml.asp>
> 
> and works are you are speaking, replaces the element with the newly
> parsed fragment.
> 
> sorry to interrupt.
Wasn't XUL designed to replace XML as a markup language within Mozilla?