Re: [UndoManager] Re-introduce DOMTransaction interface?

Thanks for the feedback. We need more developer feedbacks on this spec.

On Jul 5, 2012 1:50 PM, "Yuval Sadan" <sadan.yuval@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Passing in objects containing one or more non-callback properties is
also an increaingly common pattern, and we are trying to replace legacy
APIs that took lots of positional arguments with options-object based
replacements (e.g. init*Event). From the point of view of a javascript
author there is no difference between something like {foo:true} and
{foo:function(){}}. Insisting that there should be a difference in DOM APIs
because of low-level implementation concerns is doing a disservice to web
authors by increasing the impedence mismatch between the DOM and javascript.
>>
> I read the conversation but still feel I'm stepping into other people's
business; I'll still pitch in my author point-of-view:
>
> A. Are there any other APIs where a JS object representing an atomic
piece of data is passed as an interface-less object to a DOM function? I
don't think this includes options-objects, which are meant to, imo,
alleviate the pain of optional arguments.
>
> It seems helper functions with position-based arguments are more common:
addEventListener, createElement, createObjectURL, and more notably
pushState/replaceState (in history, which also have to do with saving
atomic records, and historical ones to that).
>
> B. On the other hand, are there APIs where objects with interfaces are
created explicitly using the interface name?
>
> Sifting through the webapps docs, I found several sporadic examples of
DOM-defined objects which are explicitly instantiated:
> - Image, Audio, Option,
> - MediaController, TextTrackCue,
> - DrawingStyle, Path,
> - Worker, SharedWorker, MessageChannel, XMLHttpRequest, EventSource,
WebSocket.
>
> Of these, the closest semantic relative is TextTrackCue, and it uses
positional syntax similar to what was suggested.
>
> Also worth mentioning is IndexedDB which is loaded with new interfaces,
but not one is instantiated by authors (might be very well be wrong, just
afaik).
>
> To sum up, as an author I vote for--
> var t = undoManager.transact("foo");
> t.onundo = function() { ... };
> OR t.setUndo(function() { .... });

How do you envision it should work with an automatic transaction?

We need some mechanism to tell the UA "record DOM mutations while I'm
calling this function".

- Ryosuke