- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 14:28:56 -0800
- To: Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org>
- Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org> wrote: > Just to confirm, we don't want the events to propagate to the window itself, > right? Correct. Sort of. Here's what we did in gecko: The event propagation path is request->transaction->database. This goes for both "success" and "error" events. However "success" doesn't bubble so "normal" event handlers doesn't fire on the transaction or database for "success". But if you really want you can attach a capturing listener using .addEventListener and listen to them there. This matches events fired on nodes. For "abort" events the propagation path is just transaction->database since the target of "abort" events is the transaction. So far this matches what you said. However, we also wanted to integrate the window.onerror feature in HTML5. So after we've fired an "error" event, if .preventDefault() was never called on the event, we fire an error event on the window (can't remember if this happens before or after we abort the transaction). This is a separate event, which for example means that even if you attach a capturing "error" handler on window, you won't see any events unless an error really went unhandled. And you also can't call .preventDefault on the error event fired on the window in order to prevent the transaction from being aborted. It's purely there for error reporting and distinctly different from the event propagating to the window. This is similar to how "error" events are handled in workers. (I think that so far webkit hasn't implemented the window.onerror feature yet, so you probably don't want to fire the separate error event on the window until that has been implemented). I hope this makes sense and sounds like a good idea? / Jonas
Received on Wednesday, 2 February 2011 22:29:52 UTC