- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 15:24:04 +1100
- To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-script-coord@w3.org, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Boris Zbarsky: >>> If you're writing IDL for something that's already in the wild >>> with this behavior, you need it. >>> >>> If you're writing a spec for something new, you don't. Anne van Kesteren: >> Are you sure? >> >> I think we'd want all event handler attributes to behave the same >> way. Marcos Caceres: > That would be nice … [TreatNonCallableAsNull]'s behaviour is actually > quite nice and forgiving (which is why I wanted to use it in the > first place). Which event listener attributes do we actually *need* it for currently? Is it a set that might creep to become bigger? Consistency across all event listener attributes seems nice to me, but I admit it is trading off against hiding authoring errors. Regardless, I don't think we want to allow [TreatNonCallableAsNull] behaviour elsewhere. It's not consistent with how type conversion is done elsewhere.
Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2012 04:24:45 UTC