- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 02:45:54 +0100
- To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@amazon.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
- Cc: "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 22:46:42 +0100, Phillips, Addison <addison@amazon.com>
wrote:
> Dear Webapps WG,
>
> I am writing on behalf of the I18N Core WG who discussed the Selectors
> API WD in our call of 3 December [1].
...
> Please note that members of the WG also found two minor editorial issues
> [3]
Actually I think one of those suggestions is substantive (it proposes a
change to requirements for conformance):
[[[
3. Interoperability Considerations: "... such implementations could
return different results from those that do support them" gives
implementations too much leeway and applications too little
information about why they're getting inconsistent results. The
specification should require one of these behaviors:
- if a selector is used that is not supported by the implementation,
the implementation must return null (for querySelector) or an empty
list (for querySelectorAll).
- if a selector is used that is not supported by the implementation,
the implementation must raise an exception.
]]]
The other one has already been dealt with.
> [3]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2008Dec/0006.html
cheers
Chaals
--
Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group
je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Tuesday, 16 December 2008 01:46:43 UTC