- From: Frederik Wessberg <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2025 00:27:00 -0700
- To: whatwg/dom <dom@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Received on Monday, 28 April 2025 07:27:04 UTC
wessberg left a comment (whatwg/dom#533) @dead-claudia yes, thanks for clarifying this to prevent potential misunderstandings. I'm fully aligned with that, and I think there is strength in that it follows the same design principles as existing observers such as `MutationObserver`, `ResizeObserver`, and `IntersectionObserver`. E.g. something like this would be ideal to me: ```javascript const observer = new ConnectionObserver(entries => { for (const {connected, target} of entries) { console.log("target:", target); console.log("connected:", connected); } }); // Observe 'someElement' for connectedness (synchronous) observer.observe(someElement); // Eventually disconnect the observer (synchronous) observer.disconnect(); ``` I made a little proof of concept of that [here](https://github.com/wessberg/connection-observer), which works well, but requires patching `Element.prototype.attachShadow`, which is unfortunate. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/533#issuecomment-2834228833 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: <whatwg/dom/issues/533/2834228833@github.com>
Received on Monday, 28 April 2025 07:27:04 UTC