- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 16:44:57 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>, www-svg@w3.org
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > > It get the feeling the Task Force is merely looking for some poor excuse > for that the <definition element="foo"> construct has nothing to do with > the definition of the foo element... It's defining the binding for the element "foo". The naming of the elements was discussed to death in the task force, so there will certainly be a reluctance to change it, but if you can think of a better element name to use than <definition>, let us know. (<definition> has other problems, like being a pain to type.) FWIW, <binding> and <element> have both been considered and rejected, although I forget why now. By the way, comments on the sXBL draft should be addressed to the XBL task force, not the SVG working group. The task force also includes members from the CSS working group who are not SVG members. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 23 October 2004 16:44:59 UTC