W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > February 2006

RE: Window object, very rough cut of proposed content for first version of spec

From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 11:22:21 -0000
To: <public-webapi@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00a901c63158$ebeda160$0e01a8c0@Jan>

Hi Maciej,

> That's what web browsers historically call the object that 
> acts as the global scope for scripts. It doesn't necessarily 
> represent a window, even in current web browsers, it is 
> actually the global scope for a particular document, so in 
> case of CDR there is more than one in a window. Or if you 
> have a tabbed UI with multiple documents in the same window.

I know, but the awkward thing is that if you are creating a new environment
that has JS but no UI, you have nowhere to put setTimer, etc.


> I am trying to propose existing interoperable features for 
> specification here, not invent new ones.

I thought that was the case, but your email seemed to be saying that other
features were under consideration, so I thought it worth asking why, if it
was more than just setting out what already exists, they would be added to
such an interface.


> If some classes of applications aren't interested in this,
> then they don't have to implement it, that is why it will be
> separate from DOM core.

That's the other way round to my question...what if some application *wants*
the interfaces, like timers (see first point), but not the rest of it.

Regards,

Mark

Mark Birbeck
CEO
x-port.net Ltd.

e: Mark.Birbeck@x-port.net
t: +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
b: http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/
w: http://www.formsPlayer.com/

Download our XForms processor from
http://www.formsPlayer.com/
Received on Tuesday, 14 February 2006 11:24:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:53 GMT