W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > February 2008

Re: [selectors-api] Selectors API comments: section 2.1

From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 23:56:27 +0100
Message-ID: <47B4C71B.2070904@lachy.id.au>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
CC: public-webapi@w3.org

Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> 
> Lachlan Hunt wrote:
>>> * What is the expected behavior of lookupNamespaceURI when a null 
>>> DOMString is passed in?  Should it match the behavior when an empty 
>>> string is passed in?  Note that in ECMAScript, for example, the tests:
>>
>> This is not an interoperability concern because the NSResolver 
>> interface defined here is not implemented in any object by the user agent
> 
> You're defining a generic interface that may be reused in other 
> specifications.  The note right at the beginning of section 2.1 says 
> so.  So this is in fact an interoperability concern, if not now then the 
> moment someone reuses this interface for something.

I have now defined conformance requirements to handle all possible 
input, and stated that implementations that are implemented by the 
application instead of the user agent have specific requirements 
relaxed.  This allows ECMAScript authors to write simple resolvers 
without without having to worrying about input they won't receive from 
the UA anyway, while still requiring UAs to be fully interoperable if 
they implement an NSResolver object for another specification.

Please let me know if whether or not you are satisfied with this response.

-- 
Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
http://lachy.id.au/
http://www.opera.com/
Received on Thursday, 14 February 2008 22:56:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 14 February 2008 22:56:41 GMT