Re: [Bug 11348] New: [IndexedDB] Overhaul of the event model

On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Axel Rauschmayer <axel@rauschma.de> wrote:
> I am really sorry to bring this up again, but: Why not separate concerns? Why not separate input data and output data?
>
> If onsuccess and onerror were handed in as an input parameters, would there be any need for readyState, LOADING, and DONE?

We decided a long long time ago, based on input from web developers,
to use DOM-Events as notification mechanism. We went through the same
thing in the FileReader API where I initially suggested using a
different type of callback, but got the feedback that developers
preferred to use DOM-Events.

Also note that the reason that your suggestion removes the need for
readyState is that your proposal decides to drop support for the
use-case that readyState aims to help solve. I.e. the ability to
register additional event handlers sometime after the request is
created.

> Then IDBRequest would be more like an event, right? It would be sent to the onsuccess and onerror event handlers.

I don't understand what you mean here. But in the current model (both
the one that's in the spec right now, and the one that I'm proposing)
we're using real DOM-Events. Can't really get more "like events" than
that?

/ Jonas