- From: Kevin E Kelly <kekelly@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 08:43:44 -0500
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, public-cdf@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OFC4FC7069.7EDA376A-ON8525712B.004B011C-8525712B.004B2410@us.ibm.com>
Maceij, Please find the responses below marked with [KEK], Your comment was accepted and implemented. Please let us know, within 2 weeks, if this change does not address your comments. Kevin On behalf of the CDF WG Action 348: Respond to comments 7+8 http://www.w3.org/2004/CDF/Group/track/actions/348 Message 7 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cdf/2006Jan/0008.html Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> Sent by: public-cdf-request@w3.org 01/02/2006 04:40 AM To public-cdf@w3.org cc Subject CDR: does disabled access lead to null or an exception? Section 2.1.2., ReferencedDocument: "If access to the parent document is disabled or there is no parent document the attribute must be null." - Language above says that if access to the parent document is disabled for reasons of security, then an exception is thrown. This sentence appears to say that instead null will be returned. Please resolve the contradiction (ideally by removing the exception). - Can access to the parent document be disabled for reasons other than security? This section should make that clear. These same comments apply to similar language in Section 2.1.3 about ReferencingElement. [KEK] Paragraphs 2.1.2 and 2.1.3 have been removed. Regards, Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 8 March 2006 13:40:50 UTC