Open Bug 1592334 Opened 2 months ago Updated Last month

Convert xml style sheets to link elements in browser.xhtml

Categories

(Firefox :: General, task, P3)

task

Tracking

()

People

(Reporter: bdahl, Unassigned)

References

(Blocks 1 open bug)

Details

To continue the "htmlification" of browser.xhtml we should move <?xml-stylesheet.. to <link> in the <head>.

There is special handling of XML style sheets in the prototype cache that may also need to support CSS in link elements.

Do you know if there is a meta tracking bug for html-ification?

Flags: needinfo?(bdahl)
Priority: -- → P3
Flags: needinfo?(bdahl)
Depends on: 1492582

(In reply to Brendan Dahl [:bdahl] from comment #0)

To continue the "htmlification" of browser.xhtml we should move <?xml-stylesheet.. to <link> in the <head>.

There is special handling of XML style sheets in the prototype cache that may also need to support CSS in link elements.

What's the goal here? Just familiarity for people who authored HTML? Other perf benefits? Afaik we're not going to stop serving browser.xhtml as XML, so from that perspective this seems unnecessary.

(In reply to Brendan Dahl [:bdahl] from comment #0)

There is special handling of XML style sheets in the prototype cache that may also need to support CSS in link elements.

Last time I checked the primary style sheet cache (which has a large perf impact) works for both types of sheets - and is even working for link tags injected later, like in Shadow DOM.

(In reply to Dão Gottwald [::dao] (PTO till Nov 13) from comment #2)

(In reply to Brendan Dahl [:bdahl] from comment #0)

To continue the "htmlification" of browser.xhtml we should move <?xml-stylesheet.. to <link> in the <head>.

There is special handling of XML style sheets in the prototype cache that may also need to support CSS in link elements.

What's the goal here? Just familiarity for people who authored HTML? Other perf benefits?

Unless if there's a particular benefit to PIs (which this bug is intending to help us figure out) we should do what most people are familiar with. We also have .html docs in tree and it's good to be consistent. For example, Bug 1582786 is a case where injecting PIs from JS into a non-XML html document caused a problem.

Afaik we're not going to stop serving browser.xhtml as XML, so from that perspective this seems unnecessary.

Correct.

You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.