- From: Jon Ferraiolo <jonf@adobe.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 06:59:33 -0700
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
Sorry it took me so long to participate in this thread, but I agree with Ian's previous comments. xbl:content elements can only reference explicit descendants of the bound element's DOM subtree using firstChild/nextSibling/etc. traversals starting from the bound element. There would be complications (infinite loops?) if you allowed xbl:content elements to reference the flattened tree since the xbl:content element itself changes that same flattened tree. At 11:36 AM 7/30/2005, Ian Hickson wrote: >On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > > > > > The <content> element is the one that is an explicit child of A. So > > > that's what gets "repositioned". And in the final flattened tree, it > > > gets replaced by what matches it, as normal. > > > > So in other words, in the flattened tree nodes 4 and 5 can't be > > repositioned to different <content> insertion points in the binding > > attached to A (since it's the <content> node that's a child of A being > > repositioned, you can't filter 4 and 5 into different insertion points). > >Good point. Let me get back to you. > >-- >Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL >http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. >Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 10 August 2005 14:33:33 UTC