- From: Joćo Eiras <joao.eiras@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 00:12:31 -0000
- To: "Hallvord R. M. Steen" <hallvord@opera.com>
- Cc: "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
I too have 3 questions:
- is the window considered as a target in the entire event capturing and
bubbling phases ?
* in Gecko yes, in Opera no.
- should events registered to the window have the document as target ?
* both in Gecko and Opera yes.
- should capturing of load events be supported too when registering a
capturing event listener in the window ?
* in Opera yes, in Gecko no as consequence of their 'fix'
The ecmascript binding needs clarification in this regard.
Hallvord R. M. Steen <hallvord@opera.com> escreveu:
> Hi,
> I have a request for clarification regarding the behaviour of capturing
> events.
>
> Opera has implemented capture of load events in the document, meaning
> that an event listener added with
>
> window.addEventListener('load', func, true);
>
> would run for every load event on IMG, SCRIPT, LINK rel="stylesheet"
> etc. in the document.
>
> This is also implemented in Safari but not supported in Mozilla until
> recently (see bug 331306 - [1])
>
> While we think Opera's/Safari's implementation is correct according to
> the spec, a number of sites out there rely on Mozilla's bug and expect
> such an event listener to run only once.
>
> Mozilla developers have proposed a solution in bug 335251 [2]. They
> suggest that load events should not propagate to the "window" object in
> the browser's JavaScript environment.
>
> Pros of Mozilla's suggestion:
> - it's backwards compatible with existing content
>
> Cons:
> - we introduce an inconsistency to the whole event listener model that
> means for example these two will mean very different things..
>
> window.addEventListener('click', func, true); // runs for any click event
> window.addEventListener('load', func, true); // runs once only
>
>
> It is not clear from the DOM Events spec how the "window" object fits
> into the capturing/bubbling. Could this be clarified? Which behaviour
> should be considered correct per the spec?
>
> [1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=331306
>
> [2] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=335251
>
> Commentary:
> http://my.opera.com/hallvors/blog/2006/12/23/firechicken
>
Received on Thursday, 28 December 2006 00:12:32 UTC