W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org > August 2012

[Bug 18630] [Shadow]: It's unclear where a 'load' event is fired for replaced elements which has an author shadow root.

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 23:22:50 +0000
Message-Id: <E1T3bJ4-0004MA-Iy@jessica.w3.org>
To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18630

Hayato Ito <hayato@chromium.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX

--- Comment #5 from Hayato Ito <hayato@chromium.org> 2012-08-20 23:22:50 UTC ---
Okay. Thank you. I don't have strong opinion on this because we don't have a
strong use case that requires option B. Let's close the bug.

Shinya, please feel free to reopen this if you encounter a use case which
requires option B.

(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > I don't have a strong technical reason, but it looks natural for me at first
> > glance.
> 
> Here's why I think we should stay with option A (which is what is in HTML spec
> right now):
> 
> 1) No additional work necessary. The HTML spec clearly states that the event is
> dispatched on HTMLImageElement.
> 
> 2)  Logically, there's a clear separation of responsibilities. The
> <real-image-implementation> is just a pixel surface. The loading machinery
> lives in HTMLImageElement, where it should be. In a way, the
> <real-image-implementation> could be just a canvas tag. It has no loading/error
> plumbing whatsoever.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 20 August 2012 23:22:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 20 August 2012 23:22:52 GMT