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).

-Boris

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