W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-hypertext-cg@w3.org > April to June 2010

CSSWG's CSSOM spec and WebApps' View Mode Interfaces spec

From: Arthur Barstow <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 09:34:07 -0400
Message-Id: <2079958A-747D-4B4E-8747-6BD79C753613@nokia.com>
Cc: public-hypertext-cg <public-hypertext-cg@w3.org>
To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, Peter Linss <peter.linss@hp.com>, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, Steven Pemberton <Steven.Pemberton@cwi.nl>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>, Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>, Arve Bersvendsen <arveb@opera.com>, "Christiansen Kenneth (EXT-INdT/Recife)" <kenneth.christiansen@indt.org.br>, Laszlo Gombos <laszlo.1.gombos@nokia.com>
[[ moved off public-webapps and www-style to public-hypertext-cg to  
focus on coordination and process-related issues ... ]]

Daniel, Peter, All,

As you know, there is some functional overlap between WebApps' latest  
Editor's Draft of the View Modes Interfaces spec [VM-I] and the CSSOM  
Views spec [CSSOM].

There is consensus within WebApps's widget group that: 1) we do not  
want any functional overlaps between these two specs; and 2) that  
CSSOM is the preferred spec for relevant functionality. (I used  
"relevant" here because we will _not_ ask the CSS WG to take on any  
widget-specific functionality.)

Below are some details about the relevant functionality in scope and  
there was related discussion in the #webapps channel on April 9 [IRC].

My first question is whether or not the CSS WG is agreeable to  
addressing (via CSSOM) our use cases?

If yes, some practical process issues include: would this require a  
modification to the CSSWG's charter; what mail list should be used  
for technical discussions (www-style, public-webapps), do we need to  
create some type of Task Force between the two WGs.

If you would like to chat about this via voice conference, you are  
welcome to join an upcoming weekly widget call (Thursdays 15:00-16:30  
Paris time). Just let me know your date preference.

-Art Barstow

[VM-I] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-vmmf/
[CSSOM] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/cssom-view/
[IRC] http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/webapps/20100409


Begin forwarded message:

> From: ext Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
> Date: April 12, 2010 4:12:13 PM EDT
> To: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
> Cc: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>,  
> "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>, "www-style@w3.org"  
> <www-style@w3.org>, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, Anne van  
> Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, "Barstow Art (Nokia-CIC/Boston)"  
> <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>
> Subject: Re: Extending CSSOM Views matchMedium with callback Re:  
> CSS WG comments	on View Modes Media Feature spec
>
>
>
> On Apr 12, 2010, at 8:50 PM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Apr 12, 2010, at 2:25 AM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Mar 18, 2010, at 6:44 AM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> 4. all these queries could/should have an event-based
>>>>>>> counterpart so the
>>>>>>>  changes are detectable by code. We understand this is outside
>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>  scope of this spec but that's still an important comment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have a proposal already for the CSS WG to review:
>>>>>> http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-vm/vm-interfaces.src.html
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems like this needs to align to the current CSS OM View spec:
>>>>> <http://dev.w3.org/csswg/cssom-view/>
>>>>>
>>>>> which has a StyleMedia interface available on the window object
>>>>> as 'styleMedia', rather than 'media'.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would expect to see events related to media type changes in the
>>>>> CSS OM View spec too, rather than in a widgets-related spec.
>>>>
>>>> I totally agree, there is much overlap. We should start looking at
>>>> how
>>>> to merge the two specs (or our requirements) into the CSS OM View
>>>> spec. I would be happy for the widgets one to vanish if the CSS OM
>>>> View spec would handled our use cases.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps we should have a joint teleconf or something to arrange
>>>> how to
>>>> proceed...  I'll leave that up to the chairs, however.
>>>
>>> To make Widget View Modes Interfaces [1] redundant, we would like to
>>> propose extending CSSOM Views' matchMedium method to have a callback
>>> as a second argument.
>>>
>>> This would address the following sections of [1] in the following
>>> ways:
>>>
>>> # 3.2. Media Type Changed Event Types
>>> styleMedia.matchMedium("screen", function() { alert("no
>>> longer screen!") })
>>>
>>> # 3.3. View Mode Changed Event Types
>>> styleMedia.matchMedium("(viewmodesyntax)", ... )
>>>
>>> # 3.4. Resolution Changed Event Types
>>> styleMedia.matchMedium("(resolution:300dpi)", ... )
>>>
>>> # 3.5. Orientation Changed Event Types
>>> styleMedia.matchMedium("(orientation:landscape)", ... )
>>>
>>> The proposal has it's origins on the Mozilla bug list (see comment
>>> from David Baron):
>>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=542058#c3
>>
>> This is overlapping with ViewModeChanged events:
>> <http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-vm/vm- 
>> interfaces.src.html#viewmodechangedeventtypes
>>>
>>
>> Do we really need both?
>>
>
> No, we don't need both. To be clear, we want to kill off  vm-
> interfaces.src.html in favor of CSSOM Views (as we have shown that it
> does more or less what we need).
>
> Kind regards,
> Marcos
Received on Tuesday, 13 April 2010 13:35:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 13 April 2010 13:35:22 GMT