Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: CDATA on Inline Scripts

Expand Messages
  • Douglas Crockford
    ... XHTML is a fiction. If it were real, you wouldn t need to hide the hideous CDATA overhead behind JavaScript comments. You would do better to write your
    Message 1 of 4 , Aug 15, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Paul" <DWTebriel@...> wrote:
      > I currently have code that looks like the following:
      >
      > <script type="text/javascript">
      > //<![CDATA[
      > ...
      > //]]>
      > </script>
      >
      > Since I'm doing this in xhtml, my IDE likes that tag being there,
      > otherwise it blows up on typical xml characters like [<]. However,
      > JSLint is returning a statement such as the following:

      XHTML is a fiction. If it were real, you wouldn't need to hide the
      hideous CDATA overhead behind JavaScript comments. You would do better
      to write your code like this:

      <script>
      ....
      </script>

      It is smaller, cleaner, faster.

      Even better, do not put any script in HTML files. Use script src.
      Separate the markup from the behavior. This tends to lead to better
      designs. It also can provide better performance because of
      opportunities for minification, compression, and caching.
    • Paul
      ... Hey thanks for the reply! For the browsers that support a content-type of application/xml+xhtml , is there any advantage for JavaScript when working with
      Message 2 of 4 , Aug 19, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Paul" <DWTebriel@> wrote:
        > > I currently have code that looks like the following:
        > >
        > > <script type="text/javascript">
        > > //<![CDATA[
        > > ...
        > > //]]>
        > > </script>
        > >
        > > Since I'm doing this in xhtml, my IDE likes that tag being there,
        > > otherwise it blows up on typical xml characters like [<]. However,
        > > JSLint is returning a statement such as the following:
        >
        > XHTML is a fiction. If it were real, you wouldn't need to hide the
        > hideous CDATA overhead behind JavaScript comments. You would do better
        > to write your code like this:
        >
        > <script>
        > ....
        > </script>
        >
        > It is smaller, cleaner, faster.
        >
        > Even better, do not put any script in HTML files. Use script src.
        > Separate the markup from the behavior. This tends to lead to better
        > designs. It also can provide better performance because of
        > opportunities for minification, compression, and caching.
        >
        Hey thanks for the reply!

        For the browsers that support a content-type of
        "application/xml+xhtml", is there any advantage for JavaScript when
        working with the DOM compared to "text/html"? If not, then yeah I
        agree that xhtml, while cool in theory, is sadly fictional.

        The only reason I have inline scripting is so that I can pass data
        directly into a view page from a controller using monorail. I keep all
        event handling and other scripting in separate pages. I would rather
        pass it in on the view than do an additional http request for data on
        top of the initial one personally. Since our web apps here use xhtml,
        I have to use the cdata tags to actually code in real (theoretical?)
        xhtml. So I was just wondering if there was a way to suppress those
        warnings for those commented cdata tags.
      • Douglas Crockford
        ... I currently have no plans to support XHTML. Instead, I am improving the HTML support.
        Message 3 of 4 , Aug 20, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Paul" <DWTebriel@...> wrote:
          >
          > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Crockford" <douglas@>
          > wrote:
          > >
          > > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "Paul" <DWTebriel@> wrote:
          > > > I currently have code that looks like the following:
          > > >
          > > > <script type="text/javascript">
          > > > //<![CDATA[
          > > > ...
          > > > //]]>
          > > > </script>
          > > >
          > > > Since I'm doing this in xhtml, my IDE likes that tag being there,
          > > > otherwise it blows up on typical xml characters like [<]. However,
          > > > JSLint is returning a statement such as the following:
          > >
          > > XHTML is a fiction. If it were real, you wouldn't need to hide the
          > > hideous CDATA overhead behind JavaScript comments. You would do better
          > > to write your code like this:
          > >
          > > <script>
          > > ....
          > > </script>
          > >
          > > It is smaller, cleaner, faster.
          > >
          > > Even better, do not put any script in HTML files. Use script src.
          > > Separate the markup from the behavior. This tends to lead to better
          > > designs. It also can provide better performance because of
          > > opportunities for minification, compression, and caching.
          > >
          > Hey thanks for the reply!
          >
          > For the browsers that support a content-type of
          > "application/xml+xhtml", is there any advantage for JavaScript when
          > working with the DOM compared to "text/html"? If not, then yeah I
          > agree that xhtml, while cool in theory, is sadly fictional.
          >
          > The only reason I have inline scripting is so that I can pass data
          > directly into a view page from a controller using monorail. I keep all
          > event handling and other scripting in separate pages. I would rather
          > pass it in on the view than do an additional http request for data on
          > top of the initial one personally. Since our web apps here use xhtml,
          > I have to use the cdata tags to actually code in real (theoretical?)
          > xhtml. So I was just wondering if there was a way to suppress those
          > warnings for those commented cdata tags.

          I currently have no plans to support XHTML. Instead, I am improving
          the HTML support.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.