Re: Event model for <A> element

Scott Matthewman (scottm@danielson.co.uk)
Sat, 12 Jul 1997 08:36:44 +0100


From: scottm@danielson.co.uk (Scott Matthewman)
To: <elmert@ipoline.com>, "Arnaud Le Hors" <lehors@w3.org>
Cc: <www-html@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Event model for <A> element
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 08:36:44 +0100
Message-ID: <19970712074034135.AAA275@scott.danielson.co.uk>

> From: Steve Cheng <steve@elmert.ipoline.com>
> [snip]
> It seems to me that there are too many events that UAs can support. For
> example, for forms you can have "onPressRightArrow" and "onPressX" (from
the
> Lynx browser), and IMG/OBJECT you can have "onMouseOver" etc. Isn't it
> futile to try to define all these events? They're not very
media-independent
> either...

Because there haven't been any event handlers in the HTML spec before, each
UA has effectively had to go its own way in terms of defining event
handlers. What we're all doing in devising the HTML 4.0 spec is saying
which event handlers a UA should support to comply with the spec.

Now, in theory UAs could add more event handlers if they wanted to, but as
a web writer I wouldn't be able to rely on those extra handlers being
present. However, I *will* be able to bind code to the defined event
handlers in the knowledge that all HTML 4.0-compliant browsers will be able
to handle them. So if anything, bringing event handlers into the HTML model
will *prevent* the proliferation of event handlers, IMHO.

----
Scott A. Matthewman, Danielson Limited <scottm@danielson.co.uk>
Tel: +44 (0)1296 24478. Fax: +44 (0)1296 392141
----
"I don't envy you the headache you'll have in the morning. In the meantime,
sleep well and dream of large women." -- The Princess Bride