- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 03:34:09 -0800
- To: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>
- Cc: public-webapi@w3.org
On Feb 14, 2006, at 3:22 AM, Mark Birbeck wrote: > I know, but the awkward thing is that if you are creating a new > environment > that has JS but no UI, you have nowhere to put setTimer, etc. I don't think anything in the spec requires having a UI. The properties are about: 1) Providing a global scope for ES 2) methods for some aspects of walking the tree of document references in a CDR situation (somewhat incomplete w/o window.frames) 3) timers 4) finding out the current document's URI and navigating to new URIs They would all work fine in non-visual UAs. >> I am trying to propose existing interoperable features for >> specification here, not invent new ones. > > I thought that was the case, but your email seemed to be saying > that other > features were under consideration, so I thought it worth asking > why, if it > was more than just setting out what already exists, they would be > added to > such an interface. I was referring mainly to other existing features that are already widely implemented. > That's the other way round to my question...what if some > application *wants* > the interfaces, like timers (see first point), but not the rest of it. We could put timers on a separate interface. But I don't think anything in the proposed interface is onerous to implement or requires having a UI. Regards, Maciej
Received on Tuesday, 14 February 2006 11:34:15 UTC