W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > January 2007

Re: Fwd: minor clarifications to ProgressEvent

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 16:11:52 +0100
To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <chaals@opera.com>
Cc: "Web API public" <public-webapi@w3.org>, Ellen.Siegel@Sun.COM
Message-ID: <mohhr2t6tf8blir9d8guk3h5kkfqt5ubh5@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>

* Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>For the namespaceURI parameter to initProgressEventNS (actually, to all
>the initXXXEventNS methods): is it legal for this parameter to be null?
>I think this needs to be clarified: is there an expectation that if the
>namespace is null the non-NS init method should be used? Or is it valid
>to provide a null value for the namespace parameter in the NS init
>method? In Event::initEventNS the description of the namespaceURI
>parameter says that it should be null if there is no namespace, but that
>clarification does not show up in most of the other event type parameter
>descriptions. In particular, it does not show up in initProgressEventNS,
>but I think that in general a single consistent answer should apply
>across all of the various event types.

As you point out, this is clear from the Event::initEventNS method, and
in DOM Level 3 Events all similarily named methods simply defer to that
method, as such I am not sure there is anything unclear here. I agree
that any other specification of such methods should also defer to the
DOM Level 3 Events specification. There is no implied preference as to
what method authors should use for events in no namespace. I will leave
the other questions to whoever edits the 'progress' draft.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Thursday, 25 January 2007 15:12:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:56 GMT