- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 22:27:29 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Steve K Speicher <sspeiche@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: public-appformats@w3.org
On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Steve K Speicher wrote: > > In reference to [1] specifically @extends: It seems somewhat clear that > multiple URIs and therefore multiple inheritance is disallowed. It only > states "the URI of a binding", could be helpful to clearly state that > only 1 URI is allowed. Clarified. > But by reading [2] it seems like multiple inheritance can sort of be > achieved by using implicit bindings as described in "4.7 Binding > Inheritance". Any reason not to support multiple inheritance explicitly > by allowing multiple base URIs to extend (or some such appropriate > mechanism in <binding>)? Multiple inheritance is FAR more complicated than just inheriting from two things one after the other. Implicit inheritance isn't multiple inheritance in any normal use of the term, it's just single inheritance to things that aren't part of the explicit chain. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 8 January 2007 22:27:43 UTC