- From: L. David Baron <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2020 14:51:42 -0800
- To: w3ctag/design-reviews <design-reviews@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Received on Tuesday, 3 March 2020 22:51:54 UTC
> Strong +1. It's better to leave hashchange for being dedicated to handling hash changes, and not force developers to structure their code like Yeah, I think that's fine. But I think it's worth mentioning the existence of `hashchange` in the explainer where you mention that use case. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/306#issuecomment-594212496
Received on Tuesday, 3 March 2020 22:51:54 UTC