gmane.comp.web.dom.general

[Bug 16713] locate a namespace returns value of no-namespace xmlns="" attribute

2012-05-15T12:13:15

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16713

Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #2 from Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> 2012-05-15 12:13:15 UTC ---
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/domcore/rev/9e09c3bcea6e

[Bug 16712] locate a namespace returns default namespace even if prefix is non-null

2012-05-15T12:13:10

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16712

Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #1 from Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> 2012-05-15 12:13:09 UTC ---
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/domcore/rev/9e09c3bcea6e

[Bug 16648] Remove "xmlns" and "xml" checks from setAttributeNS()?

2012-05-15T11:10:15

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16648

Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX

--- Comment #1 from Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> 2012-05-15 11:10:14 UTC ---
Nobody cares it seems. Lets keep these checks so the amount of weird trees one
can create remains the same.

[Bug 16492] Use [EnforceRange]?

2012-05-15T11:04:40

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16492

Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX

--- Comment #2 from Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> 2012-05-15 11:04:40 UTC ---
Closing as I agree with comment 1.

[Bug 17058] New: Namespace of document.createElement elements.

2012-05-15T10:59:35

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17058

           Summary: Namespace of document.createElement elements.
           Product: WebAppsWG
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows NT
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: DOM
        AssignedTo: annevk< at >annevk.nl
        ReportedBy: nicholas.stimpson< at >ntlworld.com
         QAContact: public-webapps-bugzilla< at >w3.org
                CC: mike< at >w3.org, www-dom< at >w3.org


createElement has the namespace of the element being set to the HTML namespace.
Shouldn't that only be the case if the context node is an HTML document?

[Bug 16490] Add [ArrayClass] to HTMLCollection?

2012-05-15T10:56:05

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16490

Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX

--- Comment #2 from Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> 2012-05-15 10:56:05 UTC ---
I also heard that adding this to NodeList might not work out :-(

[Bug 16409] DOM4: Consider LeafNode interface which Node inherits from

2012-05-15T10:53:55

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16409

Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX

--- Comment #4 from Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> 2012-05-15 10:53:55 UTC ---
Resolving as WONTFIX because changing the classes around is a huge
compatibility risk. If a browser (like with the Attr redesign) is willing to
test this out we'll look at this more concretely.

[Bug 14834] Should HTMLCollection inherit from NodeList?

2012-05-15T10:51:50

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14834

Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX

--- Comment #2 from Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> 2012-05-15 10:51:49 UTC ---
Lets do this if this is actually concretely proposed again. Although we might
hit compatibility issues with people extending NodeList and not expecting that
on HTMLCollection so maybe we should just leave it.

[Bug 17044] Cloning algorithm doesn't indicate that the "already started" flag needs to be cloned for script elements

2012-05-15T10:48:26

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17044

Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #2 from Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> 2012-05-15 10:48:26 UTC ---
https://bitbucket.org/ms2ger/dom-core/changeset/0544fd623f70

[Bug 14140] Use CaretPosition for range boundary points?

2012-05-15T10:49:14

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14140

Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX

--- Comment #2 from Anne <annevk< at >annevk.nl> 2012-05-15 10:49:13 UTC ---
Nobody seems to care much for this.

[Bug 17044] New: Cloning algorithm doesn't indicate that the "already started" flag needs to be cloned for script elements

2012-05-14T08:22:59

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17044

           Summary: Cloning algorithm doesn't indicate that the "already
                    started" flag needs to be cloned for script elements
           Product: WebAppsWG
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: DOM Core
        AssignedTo: annevk< at >annevk.nl
        ReportedBy: hsivonen< at >iki.fi
         QAContact: public-webapps-bugzilla< at >w3.org
                CC: mike< at >w3.org, www-dom< at >w3.org


If you read the "clone" algorithm in the DOM Core spec, you won't find a
normative statement saying that you have to clone the "already started" flag on
script elements.  To make sure that readers of the spec find the right
normative statement, please provide an informative pointer to
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#already-started

Please weasel in some language to suggest that SVG script elements should work
consistently with HTML script elements in this regard.

[Bug 16353] Use udpated WebIDL syntax

2012-05-04T17:08:37

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16353

Travis Leithead [MSFT] <travil< at >microsoft.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #5 from Travis Leithead [MSFT] <travil< at >microsoft.com> 2012-05-04 17:08:36 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)

Fixed. Thanks for the catch.

[Bug 16353] Use udpated WebIDL syntax

2012-05-04T16:54:16

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16353

Philippe Le Hegaret <plh< at >w3.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|VERIFIED                    |REOPENED
                 CC|                            |plh< at >w3.org
         Resolution|FIXED                       |

--- Comment #4 from Philippe Le Hegaret <plh< at >w3.org> 2012-05-04 16:54:15 UTC ---
One last mistake to fix in order to match WebIDL:

[[
 readonly attribute any? detail;
]]
any doesn't seem to accept "?".

[Bug 16919] New: Make element traversal members available on more nodes

2012-05-03T14:25:49

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16919

           Summary: Make element traversal members available on more nodes
           Product: WebAppsWG
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: DOM
        AssignedTo: annevk< at >opera.com
        ReportedBy: simonp< at >opera.com
         QAContact: public-webapps-bugzilla< at >w3.org
                CC: mike< at >w3.org, www-dom< at >w3.org


If you have foo and want the next element sibling, it makes sense to just use
nextElementSibling even if foo is not an element. Currently nextElementSibling
is only defined on Element. The same argument goes for the other element
traversal members.

Specifically, I think the following makes sense:

children
firstElementChild
lastElementChild
childElementCount
on Document, DocumentFragment, Element

previousElementSibling
nextElementSibling
on DocumentType, Element, CharacterData

I think this is similar to the new mutation methods (prepend() et al).

[Bug 16335] undefined attribute values

2012-05-02T22:34:18

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16335

Travis Leithead [MSFT] <travil< at >microsoft.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #9 from Travis Leithead [MSFT] <travil< at >microsoft.com> 2012-05-02 22:34:17 UTC ---
DOM3 Events spec now updated with these changes.

[Bug 16910] Typo in MutationObserver constructor specification

2012-05-02T22:07:39

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16910

Anne <annevk< at >opera.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #1 from Anne <annevk< at >opera.com> 2012-05-02 22:07:39 UTC ---
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/domcore/rev/910b158dfde3

[Bug 16910] New: Typo in MutationObserver constructor specification

2012-05-02T21:55:34

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16910

           Summary: Typo in MutationObserver constructor specification
           Product: WebAppsWG
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: DOM
        AssignedTo: annevk< at >opera.com
        ReportedBy: waldron.rick< at >gmail.com
         QAContact: public-webapps-bugzilla< at >w3.org
                CC: mike< at >w3.org, www-dom< at >w3.org


Created attachment 1128
  --> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/attachment.cgi?id=1128
Screen shot

Reads: "return it, and append it object to the scripting environment's list of
MutationObserver objects."

"append it object to the" is the specifically erroneous portion

[Bug 16336] defaultPrevented and preventDefault() conflict

2012-04-30T23:10:43

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16336

Travis Leithead [MSFT] <travil< at >microsoft.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |needsReview
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #3 from Travis Leithead [MSFT] <travil< at >microsoft.com> 2012-04-30 23:10:43 UTC ---
Fixed in latest update.

[Bug 16337] initEvent()

2012-04-27T23:59:45

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16337

Travis Leithead [MSFT] <travil< at >microsoft.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |needsReview
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #4 from Travis Leithead [MSFT] <travil< at >microsoft.com> 2012-04-27 23:59:44 UTC ---
With the latest update today, I've resolved this issue so that initEvent can be
invoked after dispatch for both trusted and untrusted events. I fixed the few
places in the spec that were incongruent with this notion. This should now line
up property with DOM4.

[Bug 16847] Re-dispatching trusted events

2012-04-27T23:56:21

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16847

Travis Leithead [MSFT] <travil< at >microsoft.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |needsReview
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #2 from Travis Leithead [MSFT] <travil< at >microsoft.com> 2012-04-27 23:56:20 UTC ---
Fixed in latest version.

Re: use of SyntaxError DOMException

Anne van Kesteren — 2012-04-27T08:59:07

On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 08:54:09 +0200, Cameron McCormack <cam< at >mcc.id.au>  
wrote:

I don't know really. Ideally we merge JavaScript and DOM exceptions  
somehow.