W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-cdf@w3.org > June 2006

Re: CDR: DOM Level 3 requirement / ACTION-340 ACTION-476

From: Timur Mehrvarz <timur.mehrvarz@web.de>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:28:18 +0200
Message-Id: <DC32BABA-6386-42B8-9975-258EA847BB2B@web.de>
Cc: public-cdf@w3.org
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>

Maciej,

the SVG working group made SVG Tiny 1.2 use a proper subset of the  
DOM 3 core and DOM 3 events.

No changes have been made to the CDR or WICD documents.

Let us know within two weeks if this does not satisfy your comments.

Regards,

Timur Mehrvarz on behalf of the CDF WG

On 2. Jan 2006, at 09:13, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:

> Section 2.1 says:
>
> "Compound document profiles which leverage the Compound Document
> Framework and which support scripting must have scripting interfaces
> that are compatible with the DOM Level 3 Core Specification."
>
> Section 2.2 says:
>
> 2.2
>
> "Compound document profiles which leverage the Compound Documen
> Framework and which support events and interactivity must have event
> interfaces and an event processing model that are compatible with the
> DOM Level 3 Events Specification."
>
> I have three comments on this:
>
> - The SVG Tiny 1.2 uDOM as currently proposed is not compatible with
> DOM Level 3 Core or DOM Level 3 Events. I have made many specific
> comments to this effect as part of  SVG Tiny 1.2 Last Call 3 pointing
> out some of the specific issues. This makes SVG Tiny 1.2 unusable in
> compliant CDF profiles. I request that the CDF working group formally
> raise this issue with the SVG working group, to resolve the conflict
> in these two last call drafts.
>
> - The SVG Tiny 1.2 as currently proposed has an event model that is
> not compatible with DOM Level 3 Events (or any version of DOM Events)
> because it omits the capture phase. I have raised this issue myself
> as part of the SVG Tiny 1.2 Last Call 3. I request that the CDF
> working group formally raise this issue with the SVG working group,
> to resolve the conflict in these two last call drafts.
>
> - DOM Level 3 includes many novel features some of which are of
> questionable relevance to client-side content. I suggest that DOM
> Level 2 Core/Events be considered sufficient. This may be implicit in
> allowing DOM Level 3 subsets. I request that the sufficiency of DOM
> Level 2 be made explicit.
>
> Regards,
> Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 14 June 2006 22:27:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:10:41 GMT