- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:42:24 +0100
- To: "Chris Wilson" <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, "Dave Massy" <dave.massy@microsoft.com>, "Web API public" <public-webapi@w3.org>
- Cc: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>, "Tina Duff" <tinad@microsoft.com>
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:09:17 +0100, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com> wrote: > Wow, sorry, a bunch of messages got caught in spam filter temporarily. > > I think the point was overcommunicating how this works in the spec would > be a really good idea, not "this doesn't work well." Not quite sure I follow you, but If you mean "We should explain this in more detail" then I am with you (doubly so if you have proposed text and examples for the spec ;) ). If you mean something else, I am confused... cheers Chaals > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:chaals@opera.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 12:59 PM > To: Dave Massy; Web API public > Cc: Chris Wilson; Anne van Kesteren; Tina Duff > Subject: NSResolver Re: Selectors API naming > > On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 21:35:17 +0100, Dave Massy <Dave.Massy@microsoft.com> > wrote: > >> It'd be great to have more detail and scenario on NSResolver. It appears >> to allow elements within the document to have different prefixes than >> things in the style sheet. For example if we map html as the prefix for >> XHTML in our document then we’d write it like: >> <html:table><html:tr><html:td></html:td></html:tr></html:table> >> But then we can write a selector such as: >> “h|table > h|tr > h|td” >> With a NSResolver that maps h to the same namespace as the html in the >> primary document. This seems potentially confusing. > > Hmm. This seems blindingly obvious to me, as something that if anyone > ever > forces me to hand-code I automatically do. This is how namespaces work in > general. Admittedly, if you are sharing code snippets amongst people who > have no shared understanding and are not really aware of what namespace > prefixes provide (a shorthand for a simple URI-based disambiguation > scheme), then using this feature can be confusing. I don't see that as a > reason to disallow the use case of simplifying my half of some code, > since > there is no obvious technical problem here. > > cheers > > Chaals > -- Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group hablo español - je parle français - jeg lærer norsk chaals@opera.com Try Opera 9 now! http://opera.com
Received on Thursday, 21 December 2006 18:42:52 UTC