On Wed, 02 Mar 2011 06:10:47 +0100, Garrett Smith
wrote:
On 3/1/11, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
These are the reasons they are intertwined:
* document.createEvent()
That was previously DocumentEvent interface, IIRC.
Implementations put it on Document instead. And of course we could then
On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 04:43:04 +0100, Shiki Okasaka
wrote:
I guess the reason behind this has been discussed around:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-script-coord/2010OctDec/0081.html
Actually what are the blocking issues why DOM Core does not state like,
interface EventTarget {
2011/3/3 Garrett Smith :
> On 3/2/11, Shiki Okasaka wrote:
* we want Node to inherit from EventTarget
>>> That can be stated in DOM Core. For example: The Node Interface
>>> implements EventTarget [Events Core].
>>
>> I guess the reason behind this has been discussed around:
> What is the r
On 3/2/11, Shiki Okasaka wrote:
>>> * we want Node to inherit from EventTarget
>> That can be stated in DOM Core. For example: The Node Interface
>> implements EventTarget [Events Core].
>
> I guess the reason behind this has been discussed around:
What is the reason behind what? Totally lost me
>> * we want Node to inherit from EventTarget
> That can be stated in DOM Core. For example: The Node Interface
> implements EventTarget [Events Core].
I guess the reason behind this has been discussed around:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-script-coord/2010OctDec/0081.html
Actua
On 3/1/11, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:49:48 +0100, Garrett Smith
> wrote:
>> | DOM Core defines the event and document model the Web platform uses.
>>
>> That says that DOM Core defines two different things: events and DOM.
>> Some things might implement DOM Events Core (or
On Tue, 1 Mar 2011, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 16:15:25 +0100, Doug Schepers wrote:
> >
> > I would still like to help edit that specification, to bring a
> > slightly different perspective and approach, and to coordinate between
> > DOM3 Events and DOM Core, and I believe w
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:49:48 +0100, Garrett Smith
wrote:
| DOM Core defines the event and document model the Web platform uses.
That says that DOM Core defines two different things: events and DOM.
Some things might implement DOM Events Core (or a subinterface
thereof) but are unrelated to the
On Tue, 01 Mar 2011 08:51:24 +0100, Maciej Stachowiak
wrote:
What conflicts or contradictions exist currently? Does anyone have a
list?
Some time ago I put a list in the draft:
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/domcore/raw-file/tip/Overview.html#dom-events
Glenn Maynard and I are still researching the
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 17:59:45 +0100, Adrian Bateman
wrote:
Something boxed out at the start of the Events section would be great
for now.
Added:
https://bitbucket.org/ms2ger/dom-core/changeset/a997dac35d91
Hopefully we can make sure that the drafts are aligned and if the new
DOM Core spe
On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 16:15:25 +0100, Doug Schepers wrote:
I will remove my objection to publish DOM Core if: 1) conflicts (rather
than extensions) are removed from the draft, or reconciled with changes
in DOM3 Events; and 2) for those changes that have broad consensus, we
can integrate them
On Feb 26, 2011, at 7:15 AM, Doug Schepers wrote:
>
> I will remove my objection to publish DOM Core if: 1) conflicts (rather than
> extensions) are removed from the draft, or reconciled with changes in DOM3
> Events; and 2) for those changes that have broad consensus, we can integrate
> them
On Feb 24, 2011, at 5:21 PM, Doug Schepers wrote:
> Hi, Anne-
>
> I object to publishing a Working Draft of the DOM Core spec that includes DOM
> Events.
>
> Introducing conflicting specifications that cover the same materials
> dramatically harms interoperability, and the idea of "competing
On 2/28/11, Adrian Bateman wrote:
> On Friday, February 25, 2011 1:54 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> >> The idea is to provide a better definition of the events model at a
>> >> more
>> >> appropriate location. I do not think DOM Level 3 Events is the right
>> >> way
>> >> forward, but I am happy
Le 28 févr. 2011 à 17:59, Adrian Bateman a écrit :
> My preference is to not have two drafts in the WebApps working group with
> conflicting specification of the same feature.
Looking at
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/domcore/raw-file/tip/Overview.html#events
and
http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-3-Events
On Friday, February 25, 2011 1:54 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> >> The idea is to provide a better definition of the events model at a more
> >> appropriate location. I do not think DOM Level 3 Events is the right way
> >> forward, but I am happy to work in parallel to see which turns out
> >> bet
Hi, folks-
I have no problem changing the DOM3 Events spec if that's the behavior
that implementers want specified. I'd love for it to be as clear,
simple, and precise as possible, and I have been asking for specific
feedback for the past few years; while we have gotten a lot of good
feedbac
Doug,
Le 25 févr. 2011 à 02:21, Doug Schepers a écrit :
> Finally, at TPAC, when we discussed working on DOM Core and DOM 3 Events "in
> parallel",
Would it help if the DOM 3 Events was republished at the same time, with a note
pointing to the work done in DOM Core. Something along.
"
On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 01:57:04 +0100, Adrian Bateman
wrote:
Of course it's true that the status doesn't imply everyone agrees with
everything and I'm okay with that but heartbeat working drafts are
intended to show forward progress and this feels like a retrograde step
to me
compared to the
On Fri, 25 Feb 2011, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 02:21:44 +0100, Doug Schepers wrote:
> > Finally, at TPAC, when we discussed working on DOM Core and DOM 3
> > Events "in parallel", we did not agree to adding events to DOM Core;
> > in fact, we agreed to exactly the opposite:
On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 02:21:44 +0100, Doug Schepers wrote:
Finally, at TPAC, when we discussed working on DOM Core and DOM 3 Events
"in parallel", we did not agree to adding events to DOM Core; in fact,
we agreed to exactly the opposite: you wanted to move mutation events
into DOM Core in a t
Hi, Anne-
I object to publishing a Working Draft of the DOM Core spec that
includes DOM Events.
Introducing conflicting specifications that cover the same materials
dramatically harms interoperability, and the idea of "competing
specifications" is an anti-pattern when it comes to standardiza
On Thursday, February 24, 2011 2:37 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 19:26:19 +0100, Adrian Bateman
> wrote:
> > I'm concerned about the working group endorsing a working draft with
> > phrasing like "The timeStamp attribute must be useless." I understand
> > there are issues rel
On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 19:26:19 +0100, Adrian Bateman
wrote:
I'm concerned about the working group endorsing a working draft with
phrasing like "The timeStamp attribute must be useless." I understand
there are issues related to this (e.g. ISSUE-172) but this doesn't seem
like a professional w
On Wednesday, February 23, 2011 8:21 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> Anne and Ms2ger (representing Mozilla Foundation) have continued to work
> on the DOM Core spec and they propose publishing a new Working Draft of
> the spec:
>
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/domcore/raw-file/tip/Overview.html
>
> As such,
25 matches
Mail list logo
