119478 2013-08-04 09:17:07 -0700 Implement HTML spec change to Adoption Agency Algorithm to not reverse the order of nodes in the document, by removing nodes that we're not recreating from the stack of open elements 2022-08-16 21:55:03 -0700 1 1 1 Unclassified WebKit DOM 528+ (Nightly build) Unspecified Unspecified RESOLVED FIXED InRadar P2 Normal --- 1 mike rniwa aestes ahmad.saleem792 ap bfulgham eoconnor hyatt ian mjs rniwa sam webkit-bug-importer zalan zcorpan oldest_to_newest 914461 0 mike 2013-08-04 09:17:07 -0700 http://html5.org/r/8108 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20319#c3 related Blink and Gecko bugs: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=268121 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=901319 914495 1 rniwa 2013-08-04 18:53:36 -0700 I don't understand why this specification change was made when all browsers behave according to the old specification. 914501 2 mike 2013-08-04 21:51:16 -0700 (In reply to comment #1) > I don't understand why this specification change was made when all browsers behave according to the old specification. Because the existing behavior is buggy in that it causes nodes to end up in the DOM in (from users perspective) an unexpected order; e.g., the text content of the following div ending up as "456123" instead of "123456". <div id=mike><b><i><s><u><tt><p></b>123</p></tt></u></s>456 Yeah, it's very invalid markup but dealing gracefully with invalid markup is entirely what this whole part of the parsing algorithm is all about. So this is a bug in the behavior of what the AAA is intended for, and if it's possible to have the spec get rid of the existing bug in the algorithm and handle that case more intuitively, then I think the right thing for Hixie or any other editor to do is to fix it in the spec if he can and then to try to see if browsers are willing to implement the revised algorithm or not. Of course it's collectively up to browser implementors to decide if they want to make the change. But for a case like this, having concrete spec text to review in context seems to me a least to be a lot better than just having an isolated proposal written in an e-mail message or whatever. 917263 3 ian 2013-08-14 13:31:31 -0700 While you're at it, this change to the AAA was also made recently: http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=8138&to=8139 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22926 It makes conforming pages parse correctly (before, if you nested multiple identical formatting elements more than 3 deep, you'd end up corrupting your tree; that was only supposed to happen when the document was non-conforming). 1194175 4 zcorpan 2016-05-17 23:41:46 -0700 Ping (see https://github.com/html5lib/html5lib-tests/issues/78 ) 1227773 5 ap 2016-09-08 13:59:39 -0700 <rdar://problem/28213632> 1891112 6 ahmad.saleem792 2022-08-13 06:54:51 -0700 rniwa@webkit.org - is this something fixed with this? https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/commit/67d7bd2e0aa2ed0355e51c406ff56021e603590f I know you recently did some fixes in Adoption Agency Algorithm. For other bit, only Firefox bug is marked as "RESOLVED FIXED" while Chrome bug is still Open from Comment 0. Thanks! 1891245 7 rniwa 2022-08-14 12:27:03 -0700 Pull request: https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/pull/3297 1891861 8 ews-feeder 2022-08-16 21:55:01 -0700 Committed 253505@main (6f377390c19b): <https://commits.webkit.org/253505@main> Reviewed commits have been landed. Closing PR #3297 and removing active labels.