- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 10:42:43 +0200
- To: timeless <timeless@gmail.com>
- Cc: "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
Commit: https://github.com/whatwg/dom/commit/e90ae2844f71b66a0339ef6e533bf6850238f069 On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 12:41 AM, timeless <timeless@gmail.com> wrote: > this is missing from the green box: >> DOCUMENT_POSITION_IMPLEMENTATION_SPECIFIC (32, 20 in hexadecimal). Because conforming implementations do not return it. >> If other and reference are not in the same tree, return the result of adding DOCUMENT_POSITION_DISCONNECTED, DOCUMENT_POSITION_IMPLEMENTATION_SPECIFIC, and either DOCUMENT_POSITION_PRECEDING or DOCUMENT_POSITION_FOLLOWING, with the constraint that this is to be consistent, together. > > I'm not sure what "together" means. "Adding x and y together" is not a thing? >> Whether to return DOCUMENT_POSITION_PRECEDING or DOCUMENT_POSITION_FOLLOWING is typically implemented via pointer comparison. In JavaScript implementations Math.random() can be used. > > I don't understand this either, especially not in the context of `together` Does the above help? > stray `,` after `If` Fixed. > there's a small gap here, but perhaps it would make sense to have a > heading or section or something. Not quite sure what that would say. > https://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-document-createeventinterface > >> "touchevent" TouchEvent > > why are there red bars to the right of this? There's no maintained document to point to. >> Event constructors can be used instead. > > can => should ? > rfc should meaning "unless you have a good reason not to, you should > do so", needing to support some browser that doesn't support > constructors is "a good reason" in rfc concept, otherwise, we'd rather > people use the constructors, right? We can't use should in non-normative context. Changed to "ought to" >> Note: The Range() constructor can be used instead. Also changed. >> Set root and initialize the referenceNode attribute to the root argument. > > and => to the root argument and Fixed. >> Set whatToShow to the whatToShow argument. >> Set filter to filter. > > Here (1/3) you don't use the construct `the {} argument`. This > generally seems exceptional (based on a quick scan of the document). Removed that construct. > https://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-document-createtreewalkerroot-whattoshow-filter Also fixed. > Bad link: http://www.w3.org/TR/xml/#NT-name > Corrected: http://www.w3.org/TR/xml/#NT-Name > Bad link: http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names/#NT-qname > Corrected: http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names/#NT-QName Well spotted! Fixed. > either drop `a` or add `a` after `and` Added an 'a'. >> 5. Create a head element in the HTML namespace, and append it to the html element created in the previous step. >> 6. If the title argument is not omitted: >> 1. Create a title element in the HTML namespace, and append it to the head element created in the previous step. > > I'd half argue that "6." is the previous step, although I probably > shouldn't :) -- you could say "in these steps" instead (there's only > one, and it thus should work). > >> 7. Create a body element in the HTML namespace, and append it to the html element created in the earlier step. > > Or you could consistently use `earlier` Done. >> Applicable specifications and this specification (can) use the hooks… > > This specification uses and applicable specifications can use the hooks… Mkay. >> an attribute is set >> an attribute is changed >> an attribute is added >> and an attribute is removed > > Either you should omit `an` from these or you should move it into the hook name. I don't think that matters. Perhaps once we have a more consistent naming schemes for these things... > https://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-element-attributes-get-by-namespace > >> Return the attribute in element’s attribute list whose namespace is namespace and local name is localName, if any, and null otherwise. > > Does this mean that there can be only one? -- > https://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-element-attributes-get-by-name > doesn't have this constraint. Yup. > You switch from the plural to the singular between these two > sentences. You could do `Each element`. Does the first sentence mean > that there might not be an associated DOMTokenList object? Clarified. > pattern: > Either when => When Fixed. >> A node’s parent of type Element is known as a parent element. If the node has a parent of a different type, its parent element is null. > > I'm pretty sure my parsing of this doesn't match what you want to say. > > Can you give an example? If a text node is the child of an element its parent element would be that element. If its the child of a DocumentFragment its parent element would be null. > This doesn't mention returning undefined > >> The removeAttribute(name) method must remove an attribute given name and the context object, and then return undefined. >> The removeAttributeNS(namespace, localName) method must remove an attribute given namespace, localName, and the context object, and then return undefined. > > Why do these? "remove an attribute" returns something. > you sometimes don't <sup> your th's Fixed. >> s >> comment = new Comment([data = ""]) > > not sure what the `s` is doing… Removed. > please swap the order of these two :) Sure. >> There exists some partially contained node if and only if the start node and end node are different. > > some … node => … nodes > or > some … node => some … nodes some -> a. >> The commonAncestorContainer attribute value is never contained or partially contained. > > never … or => neither … nor Done. >> A wild Range() constructor appeared. > > appeared => was added Meme! Thanks! -- https://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 30 June 2015 08:43:12 UTC