W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > July to September 2009

RE: Marked addEventListenerNS and removeEventListenerNS At Risk

From: Travis Leithead <travil@microsoft.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:45:00 +0000
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
CC: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
Message-ID: <49142F02149340458FDD20841AD0AD561CB0B332@TK5EX14MBXW651.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
I also talked this over with a few people on my team: DOM events that are namespaced are nothing like their XML-namespace counterparts. Rather they are simply [opaque name] + [NS opaque name], which is identical to [opaque name + NS opaque name]. The only difference is that it's more confusing to authors and more complexity in implementation.

It would be IE's preference not to have to implement the NS methods.

-Travis

-----Original Message-----
From: www-dom-request@w3.org [mailto:www-dom-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonas Sicking
Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2009 7:02 PM
To: Anne van Kesteren
Cc: Doug Schepers; www-dom@w3.org
Subject: Re: Marked addEventListenerNS and removeEventListenerNS At Risk

On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:39:58 +0200, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>>
>> Finally, it doesn't seem like namespaced events even solves a real
>> problem. If you want to avoid naming conflicts you can call your
>> events "com.example.www.myEvent", or even
>>
>> "http://www.example.com/myEventsNameSpace/applications/mail/emailReceived".
>
> The latter would actually not work due to the NCName restrictions,
> though maybe that should be removed too to make this possible.

Yeah, that seems like a good idea.

For the record, I think I should fess up to being an advocate for the namespaced methods way back when we discussed it in Oslo in 2006. I believe Maciej was advocating for nuking the namespaced methods. I now believe that he was right and I was wrong :)

/ Jonas
Received on Sunday, 13 September 2009 06:45:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:14:03 GMT