Re: avoid character encoding/escaping in sxml->xml or htmlprag's sxml->html

["Aleix Conchillo Flaqué" <aconchillo@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1691 bytes --]

Thank you Maxime,

On Sun, Aug 21, 2022 at 3:16 AM Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> wrote:

> On 21-08-2022 02:05, Aleix Conchillo Flaqué wrote:
>
> According to the spec, embedding inline content in the <script> tag should
> conform to the language defined by the "type" attribute (defaults to
> javascript). So, I would expect you could put any string that conforms to
> JS.
>
> """
> When used to include dynamic scripts, the scripts may either be embedded
> inline or may be imported from an external file using the src attribute. If
> the language is not that described by "text/javascript", then the type
> attribute must be present, as described below. Whatever language is used,
> the contents of the script element must conform with the requirements of
> that language's specification
>
> I am proposing to use XHTML (which is XML), not HTML. HTML's special
> parsing quirks are irrelevant here.
>
> It does, browsers (at least Chrome) don't interpret that correctly, since
> it's not valid JavaScript.
>
> As <script> ... </script> is XML, the XML parser  (not the HTML parser,
> this is XHTML!) will decode the &lt; inside the <script>...</script>, the
> result _after decoding_ is valid JavaScript.  In XML, <script> is not
> special -- everything is parsed the same way in XML.
>
>
Got it! I didn't know that was treated differently. I just tried it and it
works perfectly and it's exactly what I wanted:

https://github.com/aconchillo/guilescript/commit/c959ceff15e8e9fdf81cc59a754ed66e6bb53cc0

I avoided the <?xml?> declaration. I know that's mandatory in XML
documents, but it seemed to work without it.

Thanks again!

Aleix

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3473 bytes --]