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 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 8 May 2009 02:27:14 GMT