- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 23:11:02 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18731 --- Comment #3 from Scott Miles <sjmiles@chromium.org> 2012-08-29 23:11:02 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > Can I just hang "created" it off the Options object? Should the whole lifecycle > object be a separate item in the Options? I'm inclined to make it a separate object, but my perspective could be questionable. That is to say, I have an interest in keeping alignment with the declarative solution. Also, the care and feeding of lifecycle is maybe another discussion. Specifically with regard to supporting 'protected' API. One solution for that is to chain 'lifecycle' to the extendee's 'lifecycle', making that object the home for 'protected' methods. Another solution is to have some kind of private key on lifecycle. In either case, I want to have an object to mess with. -- Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 29 August 2012 23:11:03 UTC