W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: [DOMCore] ownerDocument of a Document object

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 22:58:13 +0200
To: "David Flanagan" <dflanagan@mozilla.com>, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: www-dom@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.vxahvbnp64w2qv@anne-van-kesterens-macbook-pro.local>
On Mon, 06 Jun 2011 17:55:34 +0200, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> On 6/6/11 6:48 AM, David Flanagan wrote:
>> I believe that the latest DOM events spec draft has made mutation  
>> events optional.
>
> If they're optional, behavior still needs to be defined when they're  
> implemented.
>
>> It seems to me that DOM Core is the place to define them (since it  
>> defines
>> all the mutation methods) if they were going to be included in this
>> spec... I'd argue that this spec doesn't need to include language that
>> is only necessary on implementations that have implemented features
>> outside of the spec.
>
> I believe that if this is spec is going to have any bearing on reality  
> it needs to address situations like this.

Fully agreed. Mutation events are not currently in DOM Core because Olli  
is planning on at least experimenting with removing them from Gecko. He  
plans to introduce a replacement that is less evil. (Userdata adopt  
handlers were only adopted by Gecko and I have no plans to add them to DOM  
Core. They are not needed.)

If it turns out that mutation events indeed cannot be killed (as many  
suspect, but it is worth trying) they will be defined in DOM Core  
(including all their gory details).


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Saturday, 18 June 2011 20:58:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:14:07 GMT