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

Re: [whatwg] seamless iframes and event propagation

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 19:10:23 +0100
Message-ID: <CADnb78gP90Pvt9LGpnYuEfRpd62M7bMM4htxEEerJhaJKr1m2A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>
Cc: Hayato Ito <hayato@chromium.org>, whatwg <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, Eric Seidel <eric@webkit.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:
>> My bad, I actually meant if <a>'s associated shadow tree had an
>> insertion point through which <a>'s child, which is <b>, would go and
>> then the event would be dispatched in <b>'s associated shadow tree. (I
>> phrased that beyond poorly however and only tried to make up for it on
>> IRC.)
>
> Okay, so event path would be (in tree order):
>
> <a> -- [shadow root] -> .. -> <insertion point> -- <b> -- [shadow
> root] -> .. -> <c>
>
> In this case, the adjustment happens twice, at <b> and <a>.

Normally with <b> being a child of <a> there would not be any
adjustment. If as you say offsetX/offsetY would be computed at invoke
listener time, you just created an observable effect of implementing
something in terms of shadow trees. (Which might not even be
web-compatible.)

I'm not sure that's desirable or even possible.

Also, computing anything but target/relatedTarget at a point target
might not even be in the DOM anymore seems very weird and counter to
how the event model has worked thus far.


> As I mentioned before, it's not solely based on WebKit implementation
> experience. Microsoft had a very similar list for viewlink and they
> wanted me to look at it when I was working on this part of the spec:
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15804

Note that IE did not have a capture phase back then. So just saying
"stopping" makes some amount of sense. With a capture phase you need
to do something else. (I filed a bug on this the other day.)


-- 
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Friday, 11 January 2013 18:10:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 January 2013 18:48:12 GMT