RE: [XBL] content element and locked

I'm with Cyril on this one. The behaviour of the locked attribute as
defined in the document is ambiguous. Please make an attempt to define
its behaviour more clearly. 
Marcos 

-----Original Message-----
From: public-appformats-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-appformats-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Cyril Concolato
Sent: Thursday, 7 December 2006 2:04 AM
To: WAF WG (public)
Subject: [XBL] content element and locked


Dear XBL experts,

This email comments on the 7 September 2006 LCWD of XBL 2.0.
In Section 2.5 "the content Element", I don't understand the definition 
of "locked". The example does not help either. I tried to read Section 
"5.4. Processing content Elements":

"Each node that is to be distributed (each explicit child node) must be 
assigned to a content element as follows:

   1. If the node is already assigned to a content element, and the 
content element is locked, then that is the content element to which the

node must be assigned, stop here."
   
The formulation is difficult to understand: why would I try to assign a 
node to content element if it is already assigned ? Please give an 
example in the specification. Then, if it is not locked, should I remove

the previous assignment ?

Could you please clarify the following points in the spec:
- is there a one-to-one mapping between a child of the bound element and

a content element ?
- Can two content elements match the same child of the bound element ?
=>  I understand it's not possible. I suggest adding "Each content 
element matches at most one node amoung the explicit children, and only 
those, of the bound element."
   
- if multiple children match the selector, are they all assigned to the 
content element ?
=> I don't know ...
I suggest adding "An explicit child node can be assigned to only one 
content element."

- what happens if a selector matches a grandchild of the bound element ?

is it valid ?
  I suggest adding a sentence like: "Only explicit child nodes are 
dispatched. It is not permitted for the includes attribute to specify 
other nodes than the explicit children of the bound element."

In section 5.4, there is a typo in step 3, remove 'and'
'If T contains a correct and content element '
                         ^^^

Cyril Concolato

Received on Wednesday, 6 December 2006 17:26:05 UTC