- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 02:01:18 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23887 --- Comment #9 from Hayato Ito <hayato@chromium.org> --- This might be a good opportunity to discuss how event path should be. In the most *strictest* world, I don't think we should add either insertion points, whether it's final destination or not, or shadow roots to an event path. If we don't add these to the event path, the event path would become equivalent to just "the ancestors in the composed tree". That would make the spec simpler. :) But I think that's a kind of ego of a spec editor. :) I guess that is very handy and convenience for developers if we add insertion points or shadow roots to the event path. That will make it easy for developers to listen events for distributed nodes, I think. If some developers don't like this *dirty* world, I think they can simply ignore all insertion points or shadow roots in the event path. That shouldn't interfere *outer world* essentially, should it? If we can close our eyes on events which happen on insertion points or shadow roots, the current event dispatching model might be close to the normal DOM event dispatch point of view. I don't have a strong opinion for this issue. Let's discuss and make the spec better one. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 27 November 2013 02:01:20 UTC