W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-geolocation@w3.org > September 2014

Re: Geofencing alternative proposal

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 13:32:35 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVsomuqwokDp-KBvncxV23Sw1skG7-JaAqUYJpiRJxuqA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Marijn Kruisselbrink <mek@google.com>
Cc: Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>, public-geolocation@w3.org
On 19 September 2014 13:26, Marijn Kruisselbrink <mek@google.com> wrote:
> Oh yes, I'm not saying that registered fences and other properties like that
> won't be maintained. But the actual event handler itself is a closure that
> can potentially hold references to any other bit of javascript state, so to
> maintain event handler bindings in arbitrary objects would mean maintaining
> the full javascript state, which wouldn't be practical.

Nothing I suggested would require that though.  Or have I misunderstood you?
Received on Friday, 19 September 2014 20:33:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:51:09 UTC