Re: [XBL] Abstract Unclear

On Wed, 10 Jan 2007, Doug Schepers wrote:
> 
> Ian Hickson wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Doug Schepers wrote:
> > > "The XML Binding Language (XBL) describes the ability to associate 
> > > elements in one document with script, event handlers, CSS, and more 
> > > complex content models in another document."  The first sentence in 
> > > the specification is not correct. XBL bindings can be in the same 
> > > document as the bound elements.
> > 
> > True, but that's not really important. The important case is the 
> > external document case, which is what the abstract highlights.
> 
> Sure.  But I thought it was important that readers get an understanding 
> of the scope of the technology, and not be bogged down in seeming 
> contradictions.

I honestly don't think this will really bog anyone down.


> > Besides your version sounding much more marketting-y and longer, I 
> > don't see that it's especially better.
> 
> Naturally, you already understand what XBL is for, but you aren't your 
> audience.

My concern with your proposed text was with its use of hype terms and its 
length, it was not an issue with its content per se.


> I don't care about the length or the actual wording.  I just want the 
> abstract to be accurate and reasonably comprehensive.  I don't think 
> that the current version is.  Maybe others do.

If someone proposes an abstract that is more accurate and comprehensive 
than the current text without hype, without being too long, and without 
focusing on inconsequential details, I'd be glad to use the text. The 
current abstract is the result of many years of comments being taken into 
account and I therefore do not feel it should be changed lightly.

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

Received on Wednesday, 10 January 2007 23:08:54 UTC