Re: Mutation events replacement

On 7/4/2011 6:39 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 7/4/11 12:23 PM, John J. Barton wrote:
>> By restricting mutation listeners to explicitly avoid DOM mutation, the
>> most sophisticated case is no different than the simple case. Then all
>> three can be accommodated.
> If such a restriction were feasible, it might be worth looking into.  
> It would involve not passing any DOM nodes to the mutation listener, I 
> suspect.

All I am asking is a few minutes of reasonable consideration for 
alternatives before many thousands of person hours become invested in 
the proposed mutation events replacement.


Received on Tuesday, 5 July 2011 03:40:48 UTC