W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: [Bug 11348] New: [IndexedDB] Overhaul of the event model

From: Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:48:47 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTikYBN2EMp+TuRL-UFuWELh+UyAxVqrODg5VJjOp@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: David Grogan <dgrogan@chromium.org>, public-webapps@w3.org
On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org> wrote:
> > If an exception is unhanded in an IDB event handler, we abort the
> > transaction.  Should we continue firing the other handlers when this
> > happens, though?
>
> What do you mean by "other handlers"? The other handlers for that same
> event? If so, I would say we should so that we're sticking with the
> DOM Events spec.
>
> > And should preventDefault prevent the abort?
>
> preventDefault usually prevents the default action of the event. The
> abort isn't the default action, so I would say no. (It also seems a
> bit weird that calling preventDefault on a success event would prevent
> an abort).
>

So if any of the event handlers doesn't catch an exception, there's no way
to keep the transaction from aborting?

J
Received on Tuesday, 22 February 2011 22:49:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:43 GMT