WebAPI WG,
I just wanted to add a few clarifications to Nandini's earlier message
on this topic (see appended message), since our deadline for PDF draft
submission to the JCP is coming up in mid to late December.
First, although the APIs will be available to whatever applications
choose to use them, 280 (XML API for Java ME) is adding UIEvent
support primarily for JSR 290 and possibly also for 287 should the 287
EG decide to support these interfaces. Since both 287 and 290 are
SVG-related, support for SVG uDOM UIEvents is fairly important.
However, since 280 is explicitly providing a subset of DOM to the Java
ME platform, we will need to follow the DOM 3 spec rather than the uDOM
spec should there be any incompatible divergence between the two.
Second, the plan is for JSR 280 to submit a Proposed Final Draft (PFD)
to the JCP in mid December, so in order for us to be able to safely
include these interfaces we need to be certain, or at least nearly
certain, that you folks have finalized the interfaces for DOM 3... we
can't risk including unconfirmed interfaces in 280 that might result in
divergence from the DOM 3 specification. So we would very much
appreciate a fairly firm decision one way or the other before the end
of December (and an assessment of how likely the relevant interfaces
are to be modified by your public review phase).
Third, the interfaces under discussion (WheelEvent and ProgressEvent)
were an attempt to take the
interfaces needed by 290 and/or 287 from the uDOM specification and
align them with pre-existing
DOM 3 UIEvent types by adding the init and initNS methods.
Finally, it seems that you already have a MouseMultiWheelEvent in
process that is a superset of the WheelEvent interface that we are
proposing. Considering that the WheelEvent is already in the SVG uDOM
specification
(http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile12/svgudom.html#events__WheelEvent),
it
seems unfortunate to break the uDOM's alignment with DOM 3 by creating
an event with overlapping functionality but a different name. If you
are sure that the MouseMultiWheelEvent is the plan of record despite
breaking compatibility with the uDOM spec, I'd appreciate confirmation
so that I can discuss with the 290 and 287 leads whether they can
acommodate this new interface in place of WheelEvent.
I'd very much appreciate your help in resolving the issues around these
UI Events as quickly as possible, ideally in time for us to be fairly
confident in the timeframe of our PDF release to the JCP. Please let me
know if I can do anything to facilitate the decision process.
Thanks,
Ellen
nandini wrote:
Dear WebAPI
WG,
I wanted to clarify that the Liaison statement I sent dated Oct 10th
is only from the JSR-280 EG, not the JSR-287 EG. Sorry for the
confusion.
Thanks
-Nandini
Dear WebAPI WG,
The following is a Liaison statement from the JSR-287/280 EG. Based
on input from several members, the EG would like to request the
following useful additions to the DOM Level 3 Events specification.
1. WheelEvent
interface WheelEvent : UIEvent {
readonly attribute long WheelDelta;
void initWheelEvent(in DOMString type,
in boolean canBubblle,
in boolean cancelableArg,
in views::AbstractView viewArg,
in long detailArg);}
void initWheelEventNS( in DOMString namespaceURI,
in DOMString type,
in boolean canBubblle,
in boolean cancelableArg,
in views::AbstractView viewArg,
in long detailArg);
};
2. ProgressEvent
interface ProgressEvent: Event {
readonly attribute boolean lengthComputable;
readonly attribute unsigned long loaded;
readonly attribute unsigned long total; void
initProgressEvent(in DOMString type,
in boolean canBubblle,
in boolean cancelableArg,
in views::AbstractView viewArg,
in long detailArg);}
void initProgressEventNS( in DOMString namespaceURI,
in DOMString type,
in boolean canBubblle,
in boolean cancelableArg,
in views::AbstractView viewArg,
in long detailArg);
};
Best Regards,
Nandini Ramani
--Robin Berjon
Senior Research Scientist
Expway, http://expway.com/