Re: [cgmo-webcgm] DOM Exceptions -- unfinished item

[Benoit Bezaire <benoit@itedo.com>]

Hi Lofton,

I think we can remove the exceptions that are unused (DOM doesn't use
them either but they've kept them in anyway).

I'm fine with keeping WEBCGMSTRING_SIZE_ERR, it's probably a good one.

If my memory is not failing me, we agreed to no exception on
style/attribute APS, but instead to add wording that out-of-range
values would be clipped.

-- 
 Benoit   mailto:benoit@itedo.com


Monday, October 10, 2005, 7:46:23 PM, Lofton wrote:

LH> All --

LH> Here is a loose end that didn't get entirely reflected in the CD2 text --
LH> DOM exceptions.

LH> 1.) Stuart did a study, and Benoit commented on it [1]:
LH> [1]
LH> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/cgmo-webcgm/200508/msg00074.html

LH> 2.) Early September, with CD2 drop-dead looming, I asked Benoit for final
LH> editing directives. He sent a message, I compared to current Editors draft
LH> spec and found differences. We sorted out some of the differences, but not all.

LH> 3.) Attached HTML table is the current status, CD2 text versus 
LH> Benoit/Stuart recommendations. Notes:
LH>     * 3 defined exceptions are unused;
LH>     * no BB/SG position on the single WEBCGMSTRING_SIZE_ERR;
LH>     * apparent consensus on removal of
LH> NO_MODIFICATION_ALLOWED_ERR from 
LH> WebCGMNode.setAttributeNS()
LH> 4.) Did we have a consensus, discussing [1] in telecon, that we would *not*
LH> define new exceptions for the methods that set SPs and AAs, if either the
LH> style/attribute did not exist, or if the value was invalid/out-of-range?

LH> Regards,
LH> -Lofton.