- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 16:37:58 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21067 --- Comment #15 from Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org> --- (In reply to comment #14) > event.path() was landed in blink as described in > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21066#c25. > > Although we still have to spec event.path(), I'd like to know whether we > still need insertionParent or not because event.path() might be sufficient. > > > (In reply to comment #13) > > Agreed. I'd like to avoid adding API unless there is a strong use case for > > that. > > > > (In reply to comment #12) > > > For events XBL1 has .originalTarget but I really hope we don't add similar > > > thing for web components. As little as possible of the shadow DOM should be > > > exposed outside. Okay. I will wait to add insertionParent to the spec until webdevs (Polymer teams and others) have concluded that event.path is not enough. If that happens, I think we need to go back to re-evaluate the opportunities for a better solution (and maybe even nix event.path in the process). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 17 May 2013 16:38:07 UTC