Re: Intent to unship: xml:base attribute

2017-05-23 Thread Xidorn Quan
On Wed, May 24, 2017, at 11:30 AM, Jet Villegas wrote: > xml:base (bug 1349024) has been removed in Nightly 55 for 2 months > now, and we haven't sen any reports of ill effects. Let's have this > testing expand to Beta 55, and on to Release if all goes well. Bug > 1350521 tracks this change riding

Re: Intent to unship: xml:base attribute

2017-05-23 Thread Jet Villegas
xml:base (bug 1349024) has been removed in Nightly 55 for 2 months now, and we haven't sen any reports of ill effects. Let's have this testing expand to Beta 55, and on to Release if all goes well. Bug 1350521 tracks this change riding the trains. --Jet On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Xidorn Qua

Re: Intent to unship: xml:base attribute

2017-02-17 Thread Ehsan Akhgari
On 2017-02-16 6:06 PM, Xidorn Quan wrote: > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017, at 01:38 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: >> On 2017-02-16 1:51 AM, Xidorn Quan wrote: >>> Tracking bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=903372 >>> >>> Summary: >>> * It has been removed from the spec years ago. >>> * No other b

Re: Intent to unship: xml:base attribute

2017-02-16 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 2/16/17 5:52 PM, Xidorn Quan wrote: Is there any reason you think we should keep the Get/SetExplicitBaseURI API? As long as we can address its current users in some other way, no. -Boris ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.o

Re: Intent to unship: xml:base attribute

2017-02-16 Thread Xidorn Quan
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017, at 01:38 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > On 2017-02-16 1:51 AM, Xidorn Quan wrote: > > Tracking bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=903372 > > > > Summary: > > * It has been removed from the spec years ago. > > * No other browser supports it. > > * We pay performance

Re: Intent to unship: xml:base attribute

2017-02-16 Thread Xidorn Quan
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017, at 01:36 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 2/16/17 7:12 AM, Xidorn Quan wrote: > > The perf penalty of xml:base is basically that we have to dynamically > > construct a URL from bottom to top along the tree whenever we need a > > base URL of an element. And since this URL may be c

Re: Intent to unship: xml:base attribute

2017-02-16 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 2/16/17 7:12 AM, Xidorn Quan wrote: The perf penalty of xml:base is basically that we have to dynamically construct a URL from bottom to top along the tree whenever we need a base URL of an element. And since this URL may be constructed dynamically, the caller would have to hold a strong refer

Re: Intent to unship: xml:base attribute

2017-02-16 Thread Ehsan Akhgari
On 2017-02-16 1:51 AM, Xidorn Quan wrote: > Tracking bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=903372 > > Summary: > * It has been removed from the spec years ago. > * No other browser supports it. > * We pay performance penalty for it. > * It makes things trickier for stylo to handle URL

Re: Intent to unship: xml:base attribute

2017-02-16 Thread Xidorn Quan
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017, at 10:25 PM, Gijs Kruitbosch wrote: > On 16/02/2017 06:51, Xidorn Quan wrote: > > Tracking bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=903372 > > > > Summary: > > * It has been removed from the spec years ago. > > * No other browser supports it. > > * We pay performance

Re: Intent to unship: xml:base attribute

2017-02-16 Thread Gijs Kruitbosch
On 16/02/2017 06:51, Xidorn Quan wrote: Tracking bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=903372 Summary: * It has been removed from the spec years ago. * No other browser supports it. * We pay performance penalty for it. * It makes things trickier for stylo to handle URL values. The t