Re: Rewritten ECMAScript Language Binding appendix

• From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
• Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 12:26:36 +1000
• To: public-svg-wg@w3.org
• Message-ID: <20090508022636.GA2219@arc.mcc.id.au>

Cameron McCormack:
> I’ve rewritten the ECMAScript Language Binding appendix to be a bit
> clearer, but still without the strict conformance requirements that
> using Web IDL would entail.

A related question: why is this appendix not normative?  In the
Conformance Criteria appendix, it says:

  Specific criteria that apply to only Conforming Dynamic SVG Viewers:
    …
    * The viewer must have complete support for an ECMAScript binding of
      the SVG Document Object Model [ECMA-262].

Shouldn’t we be requiring a particular ECMAScript binding of the SVG DOM
(i.e., the one we have in the ECMAScript Language Binding appendix)?
Otherwise the tests in the test suite that use script have nothing to
stand on.

-- 
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/

Received on Friday, 8 May 2009 02:27:14 UTC