W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > April 2006

Re: SVGT 1.2: "evt" vs "event" as the implicit event argument to event handlers

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 22:43:30 +0200
Message-ID: <1385510594.20060424224330@w3.org>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: doug.schepers@vectoreal.com, www-svg@w3c.org

On Monday, April 24, 2006, 10:12:02 PM, Maciej wrote:

MS> On Apr 24, 2006, at 1:04 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:



>> On Apr 24, 2006, at 11:28 AM, Chris Lilley wrote:

>>> On Friday, April 21, 2006, 11:37:17 PM, Maciej wrote:

>>> MS> A) I agree that changing what "event" or "evt" means for XHTML or
>>> MS> HTML event handler attributes is out of scope for SVG.

>>> When you say "changing", which is the published specification that  
>>> would
>>> change? I ask because as far as we can tell there isn't one. But  
>>> yes if
>>> this were to change W3C-wide it would be WebAPI that would likely own
>>> that spec.

>> Right now it is unspecified but there is a common de facto  
>> practice. If someone were to standardize how HTML event listener  
>> attributes work, ideally it would be a group working on an HTML  
>> standard. Web API

MS> Meant to say: "Web API is probably not the best forum for redefining  
MS> what HTML means, but may be an acceptable last resort."

Thanks for completing the thought .... I suggested WebAPI because its better to have a W3C-wide mechanism for event handlers; that helps with CDI and it also helps vertical-market special purpose vocabularies that might be combined with W3C ones in a CDI framework context.

Mind you, I thought that we already had a W3C-wide standard for programatic event handlers.



-- 
 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Interaction Domain Leader
 Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead
 Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Received on Monday, 24 April 2006 20:43:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:34 GMT