3 ms·

>Ill-formed markup, e.g., , would result in an ill-formed DOM. our parser back then would never produce ill-formed DOM, and in this case it wou

by trhway 5y ago

>Ill-formed markup, e.g., , would result in an ill-formed DOM. our parser back then would never produce ill-formed DOM, and in this case it would have produced DOM as if for - i.e. it would have inserted upon meeting to match the and would have dropped the unmatched as result after .

fifilura 5y ago
That is the DOM part yes. But it wouldn't solve the expected emphasized rendering of the supposed text after . The parser I know best would store a special pointer from the element to where it ends, i.e. the text element between and and keep track of that state to end rendering after passing the closing tag.

>Ill-formed markup, e.g., <em><p></em></p>, would result in an ill-formed DOM. our parser back then would never produce ill-formed DOM, and in this case it wou

>Ill-formed markup, e.g., <em><p></em></p>, would result in an ill-formed DOM. our parser back then would never produce ill-formed DOM, and in this case it wou