- From: Travis Leithead <travil@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 18:43:25 +0000
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- CC: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, DOM mailing list <www-dom@w3.org>
I also agree that the canDispatch API, while it has potential, should be removed from the spec. The use cases raised on this thread are interesting; detecting what user agent supports what events (though most user-agents will have event-handler DOM attributes defined on the appropriate objects for many event types). It might be worth looking into a hasEvent API to address some of those use-cases, but I don't consider that a blocking issue for DOM L3 Events. -Travis -----Original Message----- From: www-dom-request@w3.org [mailto:www-dom-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonas Sicking Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 2:30 PM To: Maciej Stachowiak Cc: Doug Schepers; DOM mailing list Subject: Re: Can Dispatch canDispatch()? On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Maciej Stachowiak<mjs@apple.com> wrote: > > On Aug 26, 2009, at 1:16 PM, Doug Schepers wrote: > > Hi, Folks- > > A little more digging (and pestering PLH) shows that canDispatch() was > added because MS didn't want to implement some aspects of Mutation > events [1], so the decision was made to allow authors to discover if a > particular event is supported by the implementation [2] (look for "willImplementationDispatch"). > > It does seem that, once introduced, it was repurposed for the more > general case, such as detecting if a Custom Event would be dispatched > [3]. I am not sure these are quite the same use case, and I think > this introduces even more ambiguity into canDispatch(). > > To me, this seems like evidence that we should drop canDispatch() for > now, and approach the problem from a different angle, with proper use > cases and requirements. > > If I don't hear objections in the next two weeks, I will drop this > method from the next draft. I have already marked it as At Risk. > > Sounds like a good decision to me. I agree with this reasoning. Same here. Though Olli is a better voice for mozilla. / Jonas
Received on Thursday, 27 August 2009 18:44:05 UTC