- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 14:21:43 +0200
- To: public-media-capture@w3.org
Den 26. mai 2015 14:02, skrev Adam Bergkvist: > On 2015-05-22 22:49, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey wrote: >> On 5/21/15 10:28 AM, Iņaki Baz Castillo wrote: >>> 2015-05-20 20:19 GMT+02:00 Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com>: >>>> Events are synchronous, so when they happen in a synchronous call, should it >>>> not happen before the call returns? >>> I don't think that events should be synchronous. They may be called in >>> future loop iterations after the function returns. > > This is pretty much the issue. What is requested in this thread is an > async event similar to the one fired when the UA adds a track to a > MediaStream as a result of, for example, a network request. > >> >> I vote for least suprising, and think we should be consistent with the >> rest of the web platform, unless we have a good reason. > > I totally agree that we should be consistent with the web platform here, > but I'm not sure what that is. To be honest, the synchronous event > dispatch behavior of the focus event kind of surprised me. Events (the basic primitive) are defined as synchronous. Things that happen in the Web platform that are described as "Schedule a task to fire an event...." effectively create asynchronous events. There are a LOT of such descriptions. I too was surprised when I read the spec and found that "fire an event" means "call the handler functions for this event", not "cause this to happen in the future". I tend to think of synchronous callbacks as a spec bug, not a feature.
Received on Tuesday, 26 May 2015 12:22:13 UTC