- From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 12:22:25 +0200
- To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
On Jul 16, 2009, at 04:46 , Cameron McCormack wrote:
> Robin Berjon:
>> - I forget the original reasoning: is it useful that the event
>> initialisers have canBubbleArg and cancelableArg since presumably no
>> matter what parameter is passed they won't bubble and won't be
>> cancellable?
>
> Shouldn’t canBubbleArg and cancelableArg be honoured when user script
> creates and dispatches an event? Even if events created by the
> implementation are always non-bubbling and non-cancellable.
To be honest, I'm not entirely certain of the value in enabling user
script creation of these events — but I guess that's another matter.
What concerns me is that all the initFooEvent/NS that we have all over
are all copied and pasted from one another, and it's not entirely
clear to me that this is not cargo-culting as I can't seem to recall
what motivation there is for all of that :)
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Feel like hiring me? Go to http://robineko.com/
Received on Thursday, 16 July 2009 10:23:01 UTC