- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 13:12:15 +0200
- To: "Bjoern Hoehrmann" <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: www-dom@w3.org, public-webapps@w3.org
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 12:57:08 +0200, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> wrote: > * Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> You have to read DOM Events either way. > > Not to answer the particular question. Sure, you might have read the DOM > Events specification, say, to figure out what Event.currentTarget is but > what it means when a specification does not define the event flow you'd > expect it to define is not something that will stick with most readers, > they will have to consult the specification just to answer the question. You'd have to read it to figure out what the "event flow" is, for instance. > (It's worse even, because some readers would not know where to check if > the XHR specification does not define it, do they have to check the spe- > cification for the `window` object aswell, or for the individual events, > considering that the propagation paths sometimes depend on the type of > event that is being dispatched, and others may jump to the conclusion it > is left to the implementation or that it's "the same" as with whatever > they are already familiar with, whatever that is.) > > The event flow with respect to some object should always be defined in > the same place that defines that object to be an EventTarget, there is > no point in optimizing the one sentence it takes to define it out using > implicit indirection. I disagree. Only Node objects have event flow and the Window object interacts with those in a particular way. All other objects do not have an event flow at all. Optimizing for those other objects makes way more sense. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Friday, 2 July 2010 11:13:08 UTC