- From: David Nicol <davidnicol@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 16:37:44 -0600
- To: www-voice@w3.org
The 2.0 VXML spec seems to contradict itself on the question of if nonmarshallable data must be returned from subdialogs or not. Such as the ECMAscript equivalent of a pointer to a function. Or even objects that refer to each others properties directly. One one hand there is the language that says that ECMAscript objects are returned, and on the other hand there is the language in section 2.3.1 that includes: Variables in the scope chain of the calling dialog are not shared with the called subdialog: there is no sharing of variable instances between execution contexts which leaves unspecified behavior WRT variables outside the scope chain, if the scope chain is considered with(application){ with(document){ with(dialog){ with( _implementation.item_scope){ EVALUATE THINGS HERE } } } } also there is All variable bindings applied in the subdialog context are lost on return to the calling context. but there is the requirement that objects are what is returned as the properties of the returned object. So: If my implementation only hides and restores the application,document, dialog and anonymous scopes, but allows an application author to write to sneakypass.foo in a script in a subdialog and read same after returning the outer context, by reading the section about "scope chain" to mean explicit scope chain, and furthermore interprets "variable bindings" to mean "VXML <var> element declarations," would my implementation be out of compliance? David Nicol
Received on Friday, 2 March 2007 22:37:49 UTC