- From: Marcos Caceres <m.caceres@qut.edu.au>
- Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 16:14:23 +1000
- To: "WAF WG (public)" <public-appformats@w3.org>
Ok, I'll take your word for it. Thanks for clarifying that. Marcos On 1/8/07, Marcos Caceres <m.caceres@qut.edu.au> wrote: > Ok, I'll take your word for it. Thanks for clarifying that. > Marcos > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ian Hickson [mailto:ian@hixie.ch] > Sent: Saturday, 6 January 2007 6:44 AM > To: Marcos Caceres > Cc: public-appformats@w3.org > Subject: Re: [XBL] Question: stopping event forwarding in section 3.10 > > On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Marcos Caceres wrote: > > > > in section 3.10, it reads: "When a binding is detached, the > > xblLeftDocument() method must be invoked on the binding's > > implementation. Then, shadow tree must be removed, the implementation > > must be removed from the bound element's list of binding > > implementations, and any forwarding of events to the binding must be > > stopped for this bound element." > > > > Just out of interest, why is stopping forwarding of events last? (or at > > least, that is what is implied to me by the text above) wouldn't it be > > more logical to stop events being forwarded to the implementation before > > the UA starts to destroy it... just in case an event slips through (as > > could be the case in a multi-threaded scenario). I'm sure there is a > > good reason, but I'm just wondering what the logic is here; that's all? > > The multi-threaded case isn't currently covered by XBL (or the DOM in > general); to handle multi-threaded cases where events could be dispatched > to a running thread or where events on one thread could have access to > bindings or nodes on another would require massive changes to the entire > specified infrastructure of the DOM. > > In the single-threaded case, it doesn't matter what order the changes > above are done in, as far as I can tell. > > Cheers, > -- > Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL > http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. > Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' > > -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Monday, 8 January 2007 06:14:28 UTC