W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-diselect-editors@w3.org > October to December 2005

Gilman-10

From: Roland Merrick <roland_merrick@uk.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 14:05:19 +0000
To: Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>, public-diselect-editors@w3.org
Cc: w3c-di-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFAD425641.F991857D-ON802570C7.004CA9D0-802570C7.004D61FB@uk.ibm.com>
Greetings Al, thanks for your comments on the content selection last call 
[1]. As part of this you include "process=once" which states: 

<snip>When the DISelect processing is being performed client-side, this 
would appear to bar the user from obtaining some adjustments to the user 
experience that they would otherwise be able to reach by adjusting 
preferences and re-processing.  What is the motivation for this option?  
Is it for efficiency when the author is confident that re-evaluation will 
yield the same result?  If so, why not state the clause in terms of "if 
process=once then the processor MAY, when the document is reprocessed, 
retain the old value established the first time processed and not 
re-evaluate the expressions in the scope of this [directive]."  Then the 
client-side processor will be sure not to be functionally impaired by the 
semantics of this feature.</snip> 

The DIWG assigned this comment the identifier Gilman-10.

This mail documents DIWG's response to your comments.

DIWG Response
=============

As the WG discussed this and a related one McCathieNevile-5, we realised 
that there are a number of deficiencies in the reprocess feature. We have 
decded to remove the process element and the associated diselect-reprocess 
event.

[1] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-diselect-editors/2005AprJun/0012.html 


Regards, Roland
Received on Monday, 28 November 2005 14:05:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:10 GMT