Re: [XBL] Inheritance chain clarification

On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Cyril Concolato wrote:
>
> In Section 4.7 "Binding inheritance", is this correct to say that a "base
> binding of the chain" is a "base binding" if the chain of binding is the first
> one attached to the element.

I guess so, yes.

> In other words, in the example, there is no base binding, because the base
> binding of the chains are 'c', 'c', 'd' and 'g' but 'g' implicitely inherits
> from 'd', 'd' from 'c' and 'c' from 'a'.

The first 'c' is the base binding.

> In this example, 'e' is the most derived binding, correct ?

Yes.

> Please explain the terms also using the example.

Done.

Thanks,
-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Monday, 8 January 2007 21:26:22 UTC