W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > March 2004

Re: Mixed bag of comments on SVG 1.2

From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 14:29:17 +0000 (UTC)
To: www-svg@w3.org
Message-ID: <loom.20040302T151959-531@post.gmane.org>

Robin Berjon <robin.berjon <at> expway.fr> writes:
>
>Jim Ley wrote:
>>This suggests that Arguments[0] will be an evt object, is that really
>>likely?  It might be best just to avoid this method and state that
>>"evt" will be available locally as the event object of the event.
>
>Would you care to explain why it is unlikely?

Unlikely is perhaps overstating it, but it's an implementation detail
which I wouldn't've used and don't seem to require it.  It's easier that 
confusing people I'd've thought.

>Yes, there's excellent reason for this. <refContent>is, as you know, a 
>real reference and not a clone. This means there are various things that 
>would cause problems such as having different CTMs or CSS cascades 
>simultaneously, even though it's the same one.

that's fine.

>Oh, and URNs make for ugly namespaces.

and http://vocabs.jibbering.com/2004/3/RandomPatternExampleForSinglePost#  is 
neat? :-)

>This could be useful, the downside being that some headers appear 
>multiple times so you'd have to always return an Array which since there 
>is no Array in the IDL, means we'd have to have an interface for 
>URLHeaderList. Which in turn means you're probably happier writing your 
>own wrapper :)

Hmm, could you not just make the lookup return the last or something? the 
lookup is just a convenience after all.

The other question I forgot I had in this one is what happens with 30*'s  Are 
they followed automagically, or does the client have to make the request anew?  
(XMLHTTPRequest objects follow 30*'s)

>That's an excellent idea. It might perhaps in fact be extended to any 
>File since it could contain metadata too. Access to it might not be 
>interoperable between UAs, but it people are adequately warned of this 
>we should be safe. Thoughts?

Yep sounds good, I'd only encourage SVGMedia type ones as required though, 
anything else is a bonus!

>>Thanks for the draft, and as I expected there wasn't much for me to moan 
>>about... better luck next time 
>
>It's only been half-updated ;)

Yes, certain horrible things need removing...

Cheers,

Jim.
Received on Tuesday, 2 March 2004 09:29:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:26 GMT