W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > February 2013

Re: [whatwg] Assigning media resources represented as DOM objects to a media element

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 22:59:43 +1300
Message-ID: <CAOp6jLYmSYQE-2HQ841Rh-0udhwFXhRPLH_nFuje4U2KwHOqUw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Cc: whatwg <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 10:39 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
> wrote:
> > cloneNode() won't work for autorevoked URLs, because it is defined to
> only
> > clone attributes and children, not internal state (with a few exceptions
> > for Web compatibility). (Don't tell me that it shouldn't work that way; I
> > argued that long ago and lost :-).)
>
> We explicitly allow for it today.
> http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-node-clone-ext
>
> That was added of course for the compatibility reasons you mention
> (mostly form controls) but I don't see why at this point in time we
> should still avoid using it for other means.
>

IIRC Ian argued against it last time. If he's changed his mind, I'd like to
hear him say so :-).

Rob
-- 
Wrfhf pnyyrq gurz gbtrgure naq fnvq, “Lbh xabj gung gur ehyref bs gur
Tragvyrf ybeq vg bire gurz, naq gurve uvtu bssvpvnyf rkrepvfr nhgubevgl
bire gurz. Abg fb jvgu lbh. Vafgrnq, jubrire jnagf gb orpbzr terng nzbat
lbh zhfg or lbhe freinag, naq jubrire jnagf gb or svefg zhfg or lbhe fynir
— whfg nf gur Fba bs Zna qvq abg pbzr gb or freirq, ohg gb freir, naq gb
tvir uvf yvsr nf n enafbz sbe znal.” [Znggurj 20:25-28]
Received on Monday, 18 February 2013 10:00:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:09:19 UTC