W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-comments@w3.org > October 2009

Re: Spec event wording suggestion.

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 11:41:59 +0000 (UTC)
To: Ric Hardacre <ricster@cyclomedia.co.uk>
Cc: public-html-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0910041140451.25383@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Wed, 2 Sep 2009, Ric Hardacre wrote:
>
> Throughout the spec a phrase similar to the following is used (square
> brackets indicate link to simple event definition):
> 
> "[fire a simple event] that bubbles called change at the element,"
> 
> 
> The english is hard to follow and I also suggest that "called" is replaced
> with "named" to remove some ambiguity about wether or not it is referring
> to "calling" a function:
> 
> "fire a [bubbling simple event] named change at the element,"

I've changed 'called' to 'named' throughout.


> The definition of the simple event would not need changing to accomodate
> the above:
> 
> "which does not bubble (unless otherwise stated)"

I haven't changed 'fire a simple event' to 'fire a bubbling simple event' 
because there are so many axes that are affected, e.g. whether the event 
is cancelable, what it's various attributes should be, etc.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Sunday, 4 October 2009 11:33:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 June 2011 00:14:00 GMT