RE: Duplicate ID in runtime specification

Hi Dave,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Raggett [mailto:dsr@w3.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 7:09 PM
> To: Mounir Lamouri; Ming Jin
> Cc: public-sysapps@w3.org
> Subject: Duplicate ID in runtime specification
> 
> The runtime specification currently has duplicate IDs for
> idl-def-systemMessageCallback in the following:
> 
> >     <section id="extension-to-the-navigator-interface-1">
> >       <h3><span class="secno">8.2</span> Extension to the <a href=
> >       "#idl-def-Navigator" class=
> >       "idlType"><code>Navigator</code></a> interface</h3>
> >
> >       <section>
> >         <pre class="idl" id="idl-def-systemMessageCallback">
> > <span class="idlCallback" id=
> > "idl-def-systemMessageCallback">callback <span class=
> > "idlCallbackID">systemMessageCallback</span> = <span class=
> > "idlCallbackType"><a>void</a></span> (<span class=
> > "idlParam">optional <span class=
> > "idlParamType"><a>Object</a></span> <span class=
> > "idlParamName">message</span></span>);</span>
> > </pre>
> 
> I have removed the id on the PRE element in keeping with other uses of
> PRE for idl definitions in the specification. If this is an
> inappropriate fix, please let me know as soon as possible, as otherwise
> we are expecting to issue runtime as a First Public Working Draft
> tomorrow (Thursday).

You are right to remove the id of PRE element. In fact, the original
index.html (before ReSpecJS processing) should have been fixed as following:
- <dl id='idl-def-systemMessageCallback' class='idl' title='callback
systemMessageCallback = void'>
+ <dl class='idl' title='callback systemMessageCallback = void'>

> The validator also insists on at least one DD element as the child of a
> DL element. To resolve this, I added <dd class="hide"></dd> along with a
> style rule to suppress any rendering effects.

OK.

> I was asked to include forward looking information in the State of this
> Document section. The unique paragraph required by pubrules now reads:
> 
> > This document defines a runtime and security model for Web
> > Applications, along with a manifest format and packaging model. The
> > current draft covers the use of CSP policies for trusted packaged
> > applications, and future drafts will extend this to trusted hosted
> > applications.

How is this related to John's summary on the list of open issues (in reply
to your previous email)? 

Regards,
Ming Jin

Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2013 13:57:12 UTC