Since 'currentScript' is already spec'd (right?) that seems better. I suppose my concern was about implementation, which is an orthogonal problem to the specification. On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Erik Arvidsson <arv@chromium.org> wrote: > Walking the ancestors from document.currentScript is a start. Is that > sufficient or should we add a document.currentElement? > > > On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:34 PM, Scott Miles <sjmiles@google.com> wrote: > >> As long as there is a way to access the <element> from the <script>, I'm >> good. >> >> >> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>wrote: >> >>> Despite little love from Scott for the mischievous walrus -- }); -- >>> proliferation across the Web, are there any other cries of horror that >>> I should be listening to? I am hankering to write this as a spec >>> draft. Yell now to stop me. >>> >>> :DG< >>> >> >> > > > -- > erik > > >
Received on Wednesday, 15 May 2013 18:42:03 UTC