Re: Mutation events replacement

On 7/5/11 3:45 PM, David Flanagan wrote:
> I've assumed that mutation events are an advanced feature that will
> mostly be used by sophisticated developers and library authors. But I
> see your point. I was worried you were saying that there quirks to the
> DOM itself that made a read-only mode impractical.

There may well be those too; I'd have to examine all the quirky DOM 
stuff really carefully to tell....

>> The only way to make it possible to tell without learning every inch
>> of the specs is to not give any access to DOM objects at all from
>> mutation listeners. Then any code you write there will work.
> But that option is completely impossible, right? Not an avenue to
> investigate.

I don't think it's very _useful_, but it's quite _possible_.  You would 
have to register the source for the listeners and they would need to be 
compiled and run in some sort of sandbox, etc.

> I have to agree with jjb: developers won't like a readonly DOM in
> mutation listeners, but the problems that it will cause are not as bad
> as those that arise when recursive mutations are allowed.

And they seem just as bad to me _plus_ require a lot more work on the 
part of the UA and spec authors (e.g. specs would need to define the 
exact set of modifications and actions that are not allowed).


Received on Tuesday, 5 July 2011 19:59:15 UTC