Java package name

Erik Dahlstrom:
> Use of org.w3c.svg package in Java bindings
>    CM: in the java appendix the packagename has changed from svg 1.1
>    ... was that deliberate?
>    ... [reads the mail]
>    AE: so JSR-287 should be backwards compatible with 226
>    CM: any objections to changing it?
>    <scribe> ACTION: Cameron to change the packagename from org.w3c.svg
>    to org.w3c.dom.svg in 1.2T [recorded in
>    [25]]
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-2110 - Change the packagename from
>    org.w3c.svg to org.w3c.dom.svg in 1.2T [on Cameron McCormack - due
>    2008-07-29].

This is now done, but I also changed to, since that seems more consistent, too.  Andrew could
you check what JSR-287 says about that package?

Mind you, I’m a little unhappy with how the global stuff is currently
handled in the uDOM.  I think ideally it would be reorganised as
follows, although I could imagine that this stuff is already baked into

I think the Global interface should be renamed to Window, and be a
subset of the Window interface as defined by the Window spec or the
Window interface in HTML 5.  From this we can get both the 'document'
and 'parent' attributes.  (The Window spec and HTML 5 do this slightly
differently; in the Window spec, Window inherits from AbstractView
(which is where 'document' comes from), but in HTML 5, it’s said that
the object that implements AbstractView also implements Window.)

Note that 'parent' as defined in the uDOM returns null if there is no
parent window, but in both the Window spec and HTML 5 (and some Mozilla
documentation, if
there is no parent window it returns itself.  It’s not impossible to
implement both HTML 5’s and SVG Tiny 1.2’s 'parent', but it’s somewhat

It seems strange to me that Connection and Timer are in the global
module, yet the operations to create instances of them live on
SVGGlobal.  Actually, I’m not convinced that the stuff in the global
module should be there, rather than in the svg module.  It seems like a
module called “global” (and Java package org.w3c.(dom.)global) should be
managed by a group like Web Apps.  I don’t know if the W3C has a policy
for managing IDL module names or Java package names.

Cameron McCormack ≝

Received on Thursday, 24 July 2008 02:11:53 UTC