Re: [whatwg/dom] Provide an AbortSignal that aborts when Nodes become disconnected (Issue #1296)

keithamus left a comment (whatwg/dom#1296)

We discussed this at the prior WHATNOT (2026-09-17) and I'd say in summary that:

- there was discussion around having a more generalised solution for CEReactions (as it might be useful to find out when a Node is connected), however this might not be useful as a signal, so we'd need to think about what that API shape would look like.
- there was discussion around whether or not this is compatible with libraries, particularly with the comment around https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/1296#issuecomment-2236978733. It was raised that perhaps the microtask wrapper is a workaround for the lack of what is now specified: move and `connectedMoveCallback()`.
- There was also a small discussion on the new move primative, but perhaps this is a non-issue as the behaviour "falls out".

Hopefully I accurately captured the discussion. I'll go away and come back with more use cases and evidence to how compatible the proposed solution would be in light of concerns with library interop, and whether or not this solves problems in predominant libraries.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/1296#issuecomment-5718389160
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <whatwg/dom/issues/1296/5718389160@github.com>