W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: [dom3events] event overview - scroll [ISSUE-120]

From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 05:36:46 -0400
Message-ID: <4C89FC2E.80607@w3.org>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
CC: www-dom@w3.org
Hi, Anne-

I've added this as a Last Call comment in our issue tracker as ISSUE-120 
[1].  I'd be especially interested in further feedback from implementers 
and from content authors and script library creators.

Comments inline...

Anne van Kesteren wrote (on 8/29/10 3:57 AM):
> On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 21:08:23 +0200, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:
>> Anne van Kesteren wrote (on 8/28/10 1:55 PM):
>>> What is the advantage? As .detail means nothing and .view is useless.
>>
>> The advantage I see is a more logical and consistent framework on
>> which to build future events, and easier for developers to learn. In
>> several of the event interfaces, there are properties that only have
>> meaningful values for a subset of the events on that interface, but
>> which are still grouped logically, so this has precedent.
>>
>> From a developer and script library perspective, there may be reasons
>> to treat UIEvents differently, and this makes it easy to detect that
>> category of events (rather than reply upon a hardcoded list of event
>> types).
>
> This all sounds rather vague. I would rather have us not change the
> interface unless a clear need is identified.
>
>
>>> Just seems like additional complexity for no reason.
>>
>> Isn't any additional complexity is negligible in terms of
>> implementation and performance?
>
> Changes are not negligible.

That depends upon the negative impact of the change.  Do you have some 
evidence of this change breaking any content, for example?


>>> It works differently for the Document object, yes. (I don't have
>>> anything I can share in test form at this point.)
>>
>> Okay, thanks for the heads-up; I didn't realize this before, and it's
>> probably the reason 'scroll' was listed as bubbling before. I've noted
>> this in the spec, in the event type definition and the event table:
>> http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DOM-Level-3-Events/html/DOM3-Events.html#event-type-scroll
>>
>
> If this is supposed to be some kind of normative description, shouldn't
> that be normative too?

Yes, I've now corrected that in the Editor's Draft... I had a brain 
lapse in marking it as a note, the intent was to call attention to it.


[1] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/120

Regards-
-Doug Schepers
W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs
Received on Friday, 10 September 2010 09:36:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:14:05 GMT