W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: [DOML3Events] ACTION-267 Proposal for event iterator

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:54:17 -0700
Message-ID: <63df84f0904301754u2e979400kcf26e2b56de70bb9@mail.gmail.com>
To: mikewse <mikewse@hotmail.com>
Cc: www-dom@w3.org
> Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> Also, would your example work even if the API only enumerated
>> page-added event listeners, and not listeners added by the
>> implementation or user script?
>
> Sorry Jonas, I'm not 100% sure on the terminology with "implementation
> and user script", but if you with user scripts are referring to external
> script
> files included by the current page (<script src=...>) then, yes, event
> handlers added from these scripts would need to be included in the handler
> listing as well.
> If my answer is not sufficient, could you maybe give me an example of
> the kinds of scripts you were thinking about?

With implementation listeners I mean listeners that the UA adds to the
DOM using normal DOM APIs. For example a UA might use a pair of
mouseover/mouseout listeners to display the url for a <a> link in the
statusbar. Or it can use a click listener to temporarily disable the
popup blocker.

With user scripts I mean things like grease monkey scripts that adds listeners.


Note that putting a glass pane in front of a link is unlikely to be a
useful "defense" for the page. Especially in the case of click
listeners since that would mean that the link can't be clicked at all
and so is useless. And similarly, removing the element and replacing
it with a new one is likely also a useless defense since the UA or
greasemonkey script can use for example mutation event listeners to
detect when the new element is inserted and add a listener to that
element.

/ Jonas
Received on Friday, 1 May 2009 00:55:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:14:00 GMT