- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 12:04:32 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
On Mon, 28 Mar 2005, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > 3.1. > > If an <xbl:definition> element is in error, what does that mean, > exactly? Is the SVG document that imported the binding document in > question just rendered as if that <xbl:import> element did not exist? > Or something else? Is the <xbl:definition> in error if the ref URI > points to a fragment identifier that does not match the ID of an > <xbl:definition> element? Apparently SVG covers this already, and sXBL will defer to SVG for error processing rules. > The example given right at the beginning of this section is in error per > the schema given in section 2.2, as far as I can tell. We will fix the schema. > 3.3. > > What does it mean that the prebind event is fired "during its > construction"? Looking at the specific rules, it seems that "after its > construction" is more appropriate. This has been changed to "before its attachment" or some such. > What are "pending bindings"? I don't see the term defined anywhere in > the specification. The term no longer appears anywhere. It now reads "Any bindings of descendants that are not yet attached, are then attached". > What should happen if a binding is detached while it's in the middle of > the attachment process (for example, say the prebind event handling > removes some <xbl:import> nodes from the document)? Or the prebind or > bound events on its descendants cause the binding to be detached before > its bound event would have fired? What would you like to have happen? > 3.5. > > The TemplateElement interface is neither defined not linked to in this > section. Typo; fixed to XBLTemplateElement. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 14 June 2005 12:04:39 UTC