W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > August 2005

Re: [sXBL] question on the <content> processing model

From: Jon Ferraiolo <jonf@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 06:59:33 -0700
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: www-svg@w3.org
Message-id: <6.2.1.2.2.20050810063618.03ed6f60@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>

Sorry it took me so long to participate in this thread, but I agree with 
Ian's previous comments. xbl:content elements can only reference explicit 
descendants of the bound element's DOM subtree using 
firstChild/nextSibling/etc. traversals starting from the bound element. 
There would be complications (infinite loops?) if you allowed xbl:content 
elements to reference the flattened tree since the xbl:content element 
itself changes that same flattened tree.

At 11:36 AM 7/30/2005, Ian Hickson wrote:

>On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> > >
> > > The <content> element is the one that is an explicit child of A. So
> > > that's what gets "repositioned". And in the final flattened tree, it
> > > gets replaced by what matches it, as normal.
> >
> > So in other words, in the flattened tree nodes 4 and 5 can't be
> > repositioned to different <content> insertion points in the binding
> > attached to A (since it's the <content> node that's a child of A being
> > repositioned, you can't filter 4 and 5 into different insertion points).
>
>Good point. Let me get back to you.
>
>--
>Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
>http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
>Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 10 August 2005 14:33:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:31 GMT