[Custom]: Consider creating registries for HTML documents created through DOMImplementation in some cases (bugzilla: 23018)

[hayatoito]

Title: [Custom]: Consider creating registries for HTML documents created through DOMImplementation in some cases (bugzilla: 23018)

Migrated from: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23018

---

comment: 0
comment_url: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23018#c0
Dominic Cooney wrote on 2013-08-20 01:43:15 +0000.

As written, if you have an document with a registry, then do

doc2 = document.implementation.createDocument(...)

to create a non-HTML, etc. document (ie one that does not get associated with a registry) and then turn around and do

doc3 = document.implementation.createHTMLDocument()

the speced behavior is for doc3 to not have a document/not process Custom Elements.

A possible alternative semantics is for doc3 to get a new, separate registry from the original document. The nice property this gives you is all documents that could process Custom Elements (ie right kind of document) do process Custom Elements, and just which registry they're associated with differs.

---

comment: 1
comment_url: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23018#c1
Dominic Cooney wrote on 2013-08-20 01:53:56 +0000.

Oops, instead of

doc3 = document.implementation.createHTMLDocument()

Of course I meant

doc3 = doc2.implementation.createHTMLDocument()

[esprehn]

What's that status of this? It'd be really nice to spec that we create a new registration context for all HTMLDocuments if they're missing one, that fixes this bug and makes it possible to create new registration contexts in frameworks.

[annevk]

As long as browsers have different ideas on types of documents (see outstanding DOM Standard bugs) and the standards still say there's no such thing as HTMLDocument, is that really a good idea?

[rniwa]

It seems like we had a rough consensus to use a single registry per document (including one created by DOMImplementation)?

Regardless, we should resolve this in v1.

[domenic]

It seems like this has been duplicated a few times: #369 and #353. #369 contains the F2F resolution.

[rniwa]

Let's use the issue #369 to track these issues then.