[XBL] Formal definition

Hi.

This is a last call comment on the XBL 2 Editor’s Draft (dated 27
October 2006).

4.4.2 Formal definition
=======================

The diagram should be updated to use terms defined in the specification.
For example, “anonymous node” isn’t defined here.


  When the explicit children are distributed and assigned to the content
  elements in the bound element’s shadow trees, expressions specified
  using the includes attribute determine which content element a given
  child is to be placed under.

s/expressions specified using the includes attribute determine
 /the includes attribute determines/
(A throwback to sXBL with XPath expressions, I guess.)


  Each node that is to be distributed (each explicit child node) must be
  assigned to a content element as follows:

I don’t think it makes sense to talk about the distrbution of a single
node (unless that node is split up).


  3. If T contains a correct and content element that is not locked…

s/and//


  4. Otherwise, if this binding has no correct  inherited element in its
     shadow tree, then the node is not assigned to a content element,
     and does not appear in the final flattened tree; stop here.

s/;/,/


Thanks,

Cameron

-- 
Cameron McCormack, http://mcc.id.au/
 xmpp:heycam@jabber.org  ▪  ICQ 26955922  ▪  MSN cam@mcc.id.au

Received on Thursday, 7 December 2006 10:44:46 UTC