W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: "DOM4 Events" Proposal (was: Spec proposals for Event constructors)

From: Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:31:02 -0700
Message-ID: <CANMdWTt7ooqxP+RfJPYsXU=KE2702iOnbxuq+WmR7npP9Jxdfw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Jacob Rossi <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>, "schepers@w3.org" <schepers@w3.org>, Kentaro Hara <haraken@chromium.org>, Dominic Cooney <dominicc@chromium.org>, Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Thu, 20 Oct 2011, Jacob Rossi wrote:
> >
> > Another feature I've been considering to add to DOM4 Events is the
> > ability to inspect the list of registered event listeners on a node.
>
> This would break an assumption baked into many parts of the platform. I
> strongly recommend against adding such a feature.
>
> The assumption is that adding an event listener that doesn't do anything
> is itself a no-op; that there can be no side-effects from such a
> registration. This assumption is used throughout the platform, e.g. event
> handler attributes, in the use of the event model by ATs, etc.
>

Can you expand on this? What does it actually affect? Could you get the same
effect by saying that addEventListener of a function that doesn't do
anything is a noop? That way, the list of registered event listeners would
still be empty, but you are able to query the non-noop registered event
listeners.


> In any case, the event model is now described in the DOM Core spec, where
> it belongs (due to its interaction with the DOM); I really see no reason
> to also describe it in the DOM Events spec. I strongly recommend just
> specifying the user interaction events like key and mouse events and not
> defining the model or events that are already defined by other
> specifications (such as 'change' or 'input').
>
>
> > Or perhaps we could make addEventListener have a return value that
> > indicates native support for the event type?
>
> What does "native support for the event type" mean?
>
> --
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
>
>
Received on Monday, 24 October 2011 18:31:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:14:08 GMT