Re: Comments on 1st sXBL Working Draft

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       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Saturday, 23 October 2004 16:44:59 UTC