- From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 15:04:32 +0200
- To: "Cohen, Aaron M" <aaron.m.cohen@intel.com>
- Cc: <www-html-editor@w3.org>
(Resend, copying www-html-editor; please reply to this copy) In reponse to your mail http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2001OctDec/0801.html about the XML Events specification http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-xml-events-20011026/ I have summarised your comments, and include our responses: * "The implication is that if there is a time model, it must be SMIL's model, and default handler behaviour is that of SMIL's" This was not the intention of the text and so the text has been modified accordingly. * Handlers have no predefined semantics. Language definitions should be required to define handler semantics. We agree. Section 2.5 says this. * Event names quoted are non-WAI compliant. They should be more compliant. While we agree with the intent of this comment, it is not a task of this specification to define actual event names. Consequently we have removed all event names from the specification, and referred to the DOM2 specification that defines them. We agree that event names and semantics should be fixed with respect to WAI, but not in the XML Events specification, which only defines a syntactic binding to the event model. Please reply to this mail indicating whether you can live with these decisions, and if not where you still disagree. If we have received no reply within two weeks, we will assume your agreement. Many thanks, and best wishes, Steven Pemberton For the editors of the XML Events spec
Received on Wednesday, 24 July 2002 09:04:40 UTC