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

Re: Multiple uDOM issues

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 02:01:07 -0800
Message-Id: <67FBF88D-C409-4818-9051-D374DDF2D351@apple.com>
Cc: www-svg@w3.org
To: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>


On Mar 10, 2006, at 5:54 AM, Robin Berjon wrote:

> Hi Maciej,
>
> this is an official response to the following comments:
>
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0194.html
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0195.html
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0198.html
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0200.html
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0201.html
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0202.html
>
> As per your requests, we have now made the DOM parts of the uDOM be  
> specified by reference. This removes various unhelpful limitations  
> that were introduced, and a number of incompatibilities.
>
> Thank you for your thorough review, please let us know shortly if  
> this does not address your concerns.

Thanks for the reply.

While what you describe sounds like a good change, I can't say if  
this addresses my concerns without seeing the actual spec language.

I also sent at least the following additional comments on the DOM  
parts of uDOM during the review period:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0231.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0230.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0199.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0197.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0196.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0193.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0192.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0191.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0190.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Dec/0189.html

I think 0197 has been officially addressed already, but I don't  
believe the others have. I will assume your response is not intended  
to address any of these other comments unless you say otherwise.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Monday, 13 March 2006 10:01:23 GMT

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