- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 19:31:12 +0100
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
* Ian Hickson wrote: >> > In addition, please make it clear that implementations that include >> > full DOM Level 3 Core and DOM Level 2 Style implementations do not >> > have to implement the "trait" APIs, since they are redundant with the >> > aforementioned specs. >> >> It's likely that I'm not understanding you correctly, but don't the >> trait APIs provide significant advantage over the aforementioned specs? >> Specifically dealing with "native" data types and computed values >> instead of strings that require additional processing/computation? > >Not insofar as I can tell. Could you give an example of trait use that >wouldn't be better handled by existing DOM technologies? The TraitAccess interface is not redundant with the two specs you cite; for XML attributes they do not allow access to the animated values, for CSS properties they do not allow access to the underlying value while animations are applied (not that anyone needs this), they do not offer access to convenience interfaces for complex types like SVG paths and they do not provide computation for XML attributes such as converting relative resource identifier references to absolute ones. Some of this is achieved through the SVG 1.1 DOM with animVal and baseVal attributes and attributes for specific members, but that isn't so for all features. Of course, the TraitAccess interface as proposed is about the worst possible means to provide these features, it interacts poorly with CSS, XML namespaces, sXBL, is only available for a few specific attributes which requires authors to consult the support table for any serious scripting work, and so on. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Tuesday, 3 January 2006 18:37:26 UTC