Yeah that was pretty much my feeling but always worth checking. On Feb 23, 2012 7:13 PM, "Olli Pettay" <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi> wrote: > > On 02/24/2012 02:10 AM, Brian Kardell wrote: >> >> Just to be clear on this: what is the status of mutation observers? > > > They are in DOM 4. The API may still change a bit, but > there is already one implementation, and another one close to > ready. > > > >> If >> there any chance shadow dom beats mutation observers to >> standardization? > > AFAIK, shadow DOM is quite far from being stable. > > >> I don't think so, but just checking... If that turned >> out to be the case it could be crippling shadow dom until such a time.. >> >> Brian >> >> On Feb 23, 2012 6:46 PM, "Dimitri Glazkov" <dglazkov@chromium.org >> <mailto:dglazkov@chromium.org>> wrote: >> >> Sounds good. Filed a bug here: >> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16096 >> >> :DG< >> >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@webkit.org >> <mailto:rniwa@webkit.org>> wrote: >> > Can we disallow mutation events inside shadow DOM? >> > >> > There is no legacy content that depends on mutation events API >> inside shadow >> > DOM, and we have a nice spec & implementation of new mutation >> observer API >> > already. >> > >> > FYI, https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=79278 >> > >> > Best, >> > Ryosuke Niwa >> > Software Engineer >> > Google Inc. >> > >> > >> >
Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 00:21:42 UTC