W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > May 2006

Re: SVGT 1.2: "evt" vs "event" as the implicit event argument to event handlers

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 09:07:54 -0700
Message-Id: <C893E5FE-CE3A-4D66-8A83-90608C9BDEF1@apple.com>
Cc: www-svg@w3.org
To: Ola Andersson <Ola.Andersson@ikivo.com>

On May 11, 2006, at 6:32 AM, Ola Andersson wrote:

> Hi Maciej,We added “event” as an alias to “evt”, this way backwards  
> compatibility is kept and the html universal practice likewise.

This addresses my concern. Thanks.


>  Please let us know shortly if this doesn’t address your  
> concern.Thanks/ola (for the SVG WG) From: Maciej Stachowiak  
> <mjs@apple.com>
> Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 02:02:53 -0700
> Message-Id: <5EA9AE66-2DE0-43C9-9C3A-5400FF860D0E@apple.com>
> To: www-svg@w3c.org
> SVG Tiny 1.2 calls for handler element bodies to implicitly create a
> function with a paramater named "evt" for the event. SVG Full 1.1 did
> the same for event handler attributes. However, the longstanding
> universal practice of (X)HTML UAs is to name this parameter "event".
> It seems like it will be terribly confusing in a CDF enviornment for
> SVG event handlers to name this parameter "evt" and for other
> languages to use "event", especially since many major browsers are
> now implementing HTML+SVG. There does not seem to be any advantage to
> "evt".
> I recommend renaming this parameter from "evt" to "event". This would
> break compatibility with SVG 1.1 but the alternative is ongoing
> confusion for content authors. Another option is to require both
> "evt" and "event" parameters but deprecate "evt".
> Regards,
> Maciej

Received on Thursday, 11 May 2006 16:09:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:54:12 UTC