- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2015 19:48:11 +0200
- To: Rick Byers <rbyers@chromium.org>
- Cc: "olli@pettay.fi" <olli@pettay.fi>, Tim Dresser <tdresser@chromium.org>, WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me>, Dave Tapuska <dtapuska@chromium.org>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 9:12 PM, Rick Byers <rbyers@chromium.org> wrote: > 1) Should we extend the existing addEventListener API or change the API > names (and perhaps other things) completely. > https://github.com/RByers/EventListenerOptions/issues/18 It seems most other "DOM peers" are okay with overloading the third argument. I can settle on that if that moves things along faster. > 2) Should mayCancel=false listeners always get an Event with > cancelable=false, or is this "just a hint" such that all listeners still get > the same event with the same properties. > https://github.com/RByers/EventListenerOptions/issues/2 I was thinking that this basically sets a flag used during the invocation of the listener that makes preventDefault() a no-op (or throw?) for that listener. But it would not affect other listeners or the Event object. The user agent could then make an optimization if no "traditional" listener was added. -- https://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Saturday, 11 July 2015 17:48:41 UTC