- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 22:17:40 -0400
- To: David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com>
- CC: public-webapps@w3.org
On 3/25/13 4:36 PM, David Bruant wrote: >> We could complicate the scoping setup for event handlers even more, of >> course. Would any UAs actually be willing to implement that (given >> that e.g. Chrome doesn't even implement the current, simpler, scoping >> setup sanely)? > Any info on why they don't implement the spec scoping rules? Because it happened to be easy in their implementation to do something with with() instead, last I checked. On the other hand, I just double-checked the bug report and they claim to have fixed it (see http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=80911 and I wish I'd get mail to some sane mail address from that bug reporting system). So maybe they'd be willing to do something more complicated.... > Is it going to be a case of de-facto standard too? I doubt it. > Only an insane option. Sharing as food for thoughts: > when about to call a function from an eval'ed on* attribute string, > change the function's [[Scope]] to contain an extra scope with an > "event" variable. Restore the [[Scope]] to its original value when the > frame is dropped. I think that qualifies as insane, yes. ;) -Boris
Received on Tuesday, 26 March 2013 02:18:09 UTC