- From: Doug Schepers <doug.schepers@vectoreal.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 15:58:52 -0500
- To: "'Ian Hickson'" <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: <www-svg@w3.org>
Hi, Ian- Thanks for the response. Ian Hickson wrote: | | On Thu, 16 Feb 2006, Doug Schepers wrote: | > | > | > By the way, I assume that a <script> element with non-text | > | children is in | > | > error, right? | > | | > | It can't be in error, there might be XML based script languages. | > | > Good catch, Jim. Does wording need to be put in the spec to | cover this | > eventuality? | | The W3C already has at least one XML-based scripting language | in REC, and | has recently published a WD for another XML-based scripting | language, so | I'd say yes. | | XForms Actions: | http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms/slice10.html | | REX: | http://www.w3.org/TR/rex/ Very good examples, Ian, and I suspect more XML scripting languages are on the way. My only question is whether these would need to be contained within a script block, or only properly namespaced (and accessed in a UA that implements them)? I would be happy to raise this as a topic for discussion with the SVG WG, if the public consensus is that they need to be (or can be) executable children of a script element. Regards- Doug doug.schepers@vectoreal.com www.vectoreal.com ...for scalable solutions.
Received on Thursday, 16 February 2006 20:59:04 UTC