Some clarifications

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Some clarifications

denis sureau
I have just finished the french translation and I believe some clarifications are needed...

1) Some sentences need to be clarified:

"When the constructor is invoked a pointer to the Window object which initially had XMLHttpRequest as an attribute of which the constructor was invoked must be stored on the newly created object, called the Window pointer."

"and the  fragment identifier component, if any, must be dropped"

"serialized into a namespace well-formed XML document"

2) What's the send() flag?

"If the state is not open or  the send()  flag is set".

3) Coherency.

In getAllResponseHeaders :
If the state is not receiving or loaded, user agents

In getReponseHeader:
If the state is not receiving or loaded, the user agent

Why several user agents in a paragraph and then a single one in the following paragraph?

4) A more complete example of POST, as the one I have provided in a previous post
(Re: [XHR] Unespected case) could be useful.


Denis Sureau. http://ajax.xul.fr


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [XHR] Some clarifications

Anne van Kesteren-2

On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 12:01:52 +0100, denis sureau <[hidden email]>  
wrote:

> 1) Some sentences need to be clarified:
>
> "When the constructor is invoked a pointer to the Window object which
> initially had XMLHttpRequest as an attribute of which the constructor was
> invoked must be stored on the newly created object, called the Window
> pointer."
>
> "and the  fragment identifier component, if any, must be dropped"
>
> "serialized into a namespace well-formed XML document"

What's to clarify? These all seem perfectly reasonable to me.


> 2) What's the send() flag?
>
> "If the state is not open or  the send()  flag is set".

Follow the pointer. It's defined.


> 3) Coherency.
>
> In getAllResponseHeaders :
> If the state is not receiving or loaded, user agents
>
> In getReponseHeader:
> If the state is not receiving or loaded, the user agent
>
> Why several user agents in a paragraph and then a single one in the
> following paragraph?

Fixed throughout.


> 4) A more complete example of POST, as the one I have provided in a  
> previous post (Re: [XHR] Unespected case) could be useful.

I changed the POST example slightly to more closely match yours.

Cheers,


--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [XHR] Some clarifications

Charles McCathieNevile-2

On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 09:55:18 -0700, Anne van Kesteren <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 12:01:52 +0100, denis sureau <[hidden email]>
>> 1) Some sentences need to be clarified:
>>
>> "When the constructor is invoked a pointer to the Window object which
>> initially had XMLHttpRequest as an attribute of which the constructor was
>> invoked must be stored on the newly created object, called the Window
>> pointer."

This is pretty tortuous. At the very least a few commas, to clarify the parsing, would be helpful. If I understand the grammar correctly (and I am not convinced that I do), I think this could be simplified as

"When the constructor is evoked, a Window pointer must be stored on the newly created object. This is a pointer to the Window object within whose scope the constructor was invoked.

(That's still kind of involved and unpleasant, but closer to something that is parseable.)

cheers

Chaals

--
  Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
  hablo español  -  je parle français  -  jeg lærer norsk
[hidden email]          Try Opera 9.1     http://opera.com

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [XHR] Some clarifications

denis sureau
In reply to this post by denis sureau
Thanks for the corrections and explanations.

I'll translate the first sentence as that:

1) some object is created by a call to the constructor
2) it is created from a window
3) the window had an attribute XMLHttpRequest before this call
4) a window pointer is stored in the newly created object
5) it points out this window

Is it right?

Another question.
Why not a responseHTML attribute?


Denis Sureau - http://www.xul.fr/ajax/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [XHR] Some clarifications

Anne van Kesteren-2

On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 15:11:38 +0100, denis sureau <[hidden email]>  
wrote:

> Thanks for the corrections and explanations.
>
> I'll translate the first sentence as that:
>
> 1) some object is created by a call to the constructor
> 2) it is created from a window
> 3) the window had an attribute XMLHttpRequest before this call
> 4) a window pointer is stored in the newly created object
> 5) it points out this window
>
> Is it right?

Sort of. I tried to clarify this now:

   http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/webapi/XMLHttpRequest/Overview.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#xmlhttprequest

(This should hopefully also address your concern Charles. Raised in this  
thread.)


> Another question.
> Why not a responseHTML attribute?

Because a) we're not going to add new complicated features at this time  
(HTML isn't really defined) and b) the plan is to support HTML through  
responseXML in version 2 or 3.


--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [XHR] Some clarifications

Charles McCathieNevile-2

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 10:46:00 -0400, Anne van Kesteren <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 15:11:38 +0100, denis sureau <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>> Thanks for the corrections and explanations.
>>
>> I'll translate the first sentence as that:
>>
>> 1) some object is created by a call to the constructor
>> 2) it is created from a window
>> 3) the window had an attribute XMLHttpRequest before this call
>> 4) a window pointer is stored in the newly created object
>> 5) it points out this window
>>
>> Is it right?
>
> Sort of. I tried to clarify this now:
>
>    http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/webapi/XMLHttpRequest/Overview.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#xmlhttprequest
>
> (This should hopefully also address your concern Charles. Raised in this
> thread.)

Yep, thanks. As an editorial amendment you could clarify how long it has to persist (not until the heat death of the universe, right?). But this seems clear to me now.

cheers

chaals

--
  Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
  hablo español  -  je parle français  -  jeg lærer norsk
[hidden email]          Try Opera 9.1     http://opera.com

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [XHR] Some clarifications

denis sureau
In reply to this post by Anne van Kesteren-2


2007/3/20, Anne van Kesteren <[hidden email]>:
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 15:11:38 +0100, denis sureau <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Thanks for the corrections and explanations.
>
> I'll translate the first sentence as that:
>
> 1) some object is created by a call to the constructor
> 2) it is created from a window
> 3) the window had an attribute XMLHttpRequest before this call
> 4) a window pointer is stored in the newly created object
> 5) it points out this window
>
> Is it right?

Sort of. I tried to clarify this now:

   http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/webapi/XMLHttpRequest/Overview.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#xmlhttprequest

(This should hopefully also address your concern Charles. Raised in this
thread.)

I have followed the link, and this is perfectly clear!

> Another question.
> Why not a responseHTML attribute?

Because a) we're not going to add new complicated features at this time
(HTML isn't really defined) and b) the plan is to support HTML through
responseXML in version 2 or 3.

OK, we have to wait for these versions.
For the ones that want not to wait, I have overcomed the lack of responseHTML by using responseText, see the article:

http://www.xul.fr/ajax/responseHTML-attribute.html

Denis Sureau. http://www.xul.fr/ajax/
 

--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [XHR] Some clarifications

denis sureau
Sorry if it is confusing, I have embedded my post inside the message of Anna van Kesteren. Is am the author of the last post.