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

Re: new draft of W3C liason stmt

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 11:28:18 -0500
To: Ellen.Siegel@sun.com, public-webapi@w3.org
Cc: Nandini.Ramani@sun.com
Message-ID: <op.tmtmpgrowxe0ny@30-5-51.wireless.csail.mit.edu>

Hi Ellen,

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 12:03:59 -0500, Ellen Siegel <Ellen.Siegel@Sun.COM>  
wrote:

> 1) MouseWheelEvent
> There was a WheelEvent in the SVG spec that the SVG WG has requested be 
> added to DOM 3. The current status is that a substantially similar 
> MouseWheelEvent has been added to the current DOM 3 spec. JSR 280 will
> align with the version that
> is approved in the DOM 3 spec; however, we need the DOM 3 version ofthis 
> API to be frozen before we can submit our FAB specification.

We have attempted to resolve this by removing key events from the current  
DOM 3
Events spec which should allow us to publish it very soon.

> 2) ProgressEvent
> The status is much the same as for MouseWheelEvent, except that in this 
> case the name proposed in the DOM 3 spec remains the same. JSR 280 will
> align with the version that is approved in the DOM 3 spec; however, we
> need the DOM 3 version
> of this API to be frozen before we can submit our FAB specification.

A new editor's draft[1] has been published, and we will be requesting  
formal
draft status and moving this spec as fast as we can

> 3) ElementTraversal
> There is a request pending to add ElementTraversal to the DOM 3 Core.The 
> status of this is still open ended. JSR 280 has included this in
> our PFD spec submission in the hopes that we will get the addition
> to DOM 3 approved, since it would facilitate the alignment of a
> number of different standards.Again, we need the DOM 3 version of this 
> API to be frozen before we
> can submit our FAB specification.

We have a draft specification [2], but it has no assigned editor. If we  
get the
resources to edit this document it should not be difficult to finish it and
follow it through the W3C publication process. Among the possibilities are  
for
Sun to join the working group and assign an editor. It is also apparently
possible that Doug Schepers will find time to work on this.

> 4) Event groups
> Event groups were included in an earlier draft of the DOM 3 Event
> specification, and have been removed from the most recent version.
> The JSR 280 PFD spec has kept the event group argument since the issue
> is still under discussion, but we
> will remove it from our FAB spec if the elimination from the final DOM 3
> specification has been frozen in time for our FAB submission.

We have removed Event groups, and don't anticipate changing that decision.

Thanks to Nandini for turning up to our meeting and working with us on  
these
issues. I hope that we can continue to move fast enough to help you meet  
your
requirements.

[1] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/webapi/progress/Progress.html
[2]  
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/webapi/ElementTraversal/publish/ElementTraversal.html

cheers

Chaals (as WebAPI chair)

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
hablo español - je parle français - jeg lærer norsk
chaals@opera.com Try Opera 9.1 http://opera.com
Received on Saturday, 27 January 2007 16:28:22 GMT

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