Editorial: use infra for lists and sets #79
Conversation
| @@ -102,7 +105,7 @@ it from its <a>node document</a>'s <a>top layer</a>. | |||
| that have their <a>fullscreen flag</a> set, in <a>shadow-including tree order</a>. | |||
|
|
|||
| <li> | |||
| <p>For each <var>node</var> in <var>nodes</var>, run these substeps: | |||
| <p><a>For each</a> <var>node</var> in <var>nodes</var>, run these substeps: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This needs a for attribute I think.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since only "for each" is used now, I've gone with "type:dfn; for:set; text:for each" to make the source a bit more readable.
fullscreen.bs
Outdated
| <var>fullscreenElements</var>. | ||
| <!-- cross-process --> | ||
|
|
||
| <li><p>Let <var>eventDocs</var> be an empty list. | ||
| <li><p>Let <var>eventDocs</var> be an empty <a>list</a>. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure. I'm going to suggest removing it next, but let's not assume that's the final shape of the spec, more compat problems might revert it.
fullscreen.bs
Outdated
|
|
||
| <li> | ||
| <p>For each <var>element</var> in <var>fullscreenElements</var>, in order, run these | ||
| <p><a>For each</a> <var>element</var> in <var>fullscreenElements</var>, run these |
fullscreen.bs
Outdated
| @@ -252,16 +255,16 @@ these steps: | |||
|
|
|||
| <p class=note>No need to notify observers when nothing has changed. | |||
|
|
|||
| <li><p>Otherwise, append <var>doc</var> to <var>eventDocs</var>. | |||
| <li><p>Otherwise, <a for=list>append</a> <var>doc</var> to <var>eventDocs</var>. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we change eventDocs to be a set, this needs to change.
|
|
||
| <li><p>If <var>element</var> is <var>pending</var> and <var>pending</var> is an <{iframe}> | ||
| <a>element</a>, then set <var>element</var>'s <a>iframe fullscreen flag</a>. | ||
|
|
||
| <li><p><a lt="Fullscreen an element">Fullscreen <var>element</var></a> within <var>doc</var>. | ||
| </ol> | ||
|
|
||
| <li><p>For each <var>doc</var> in <var>eventDocs</var>, in order, <a>fire an event</a> named | ||
| <code>fullscreenchange</code> on <var>doc</var>. | ||
| <li><p><a>For each</a> <var>doc</var> in <var>eventDocs</var>, <a>fire an event</a> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And a couple more of these below.
fullscreen.bs
Outdated
|
|
||
| <p>To <dfn export for="top layer">remove</dfn> an <var>element</var> from a <var>top layer</var>, | ||
| remove <var>element</var> from <var>top layer</var>. | ||
| <a for=set>remove</a> <var>element</var> from <var>top layer</var>. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Given that these are identical, perhaps we should no longer have a dedicated remove entry point?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, let's say that the top layer is an ordered set instead of that it consists of it, that'll make it natural to remove the extra remove layer.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ugh, but HTML uses #top-layer-remove. Now I'm going to pretend that it's deliberate that top layer is an abstraction layer you have to go through in case we want to change what kind of data structure it is :)
Yeah, some of this will go away, some for loops will move, so I figured it's best to avoid those discussions in the real upcoming changes. |
With whatwg/fullscreen#79, the top layer is just an ordered set, and the remove operation does need any indirection.
|
OK, #79 and whatwg/html#2650 good to go I think, but don't assume I didn't make mistakes :) |
This also clarifies the description of top layer order somewhat. In whatwg/html#2650 HTML is adjusted to match.
With whatwg/fullscreen#79, the top layer is just an ordered set, and the remove operation does not need any indirection.
foolip
changed the title
With whatwg/fullscreen#79, the top layer is just an ordered set, and the remove operation does not need any indirection.
This also clarifies the description of top layer order somewhat.
Preview | Diff