RE: Marked addEventListenerNS and removeEventListenerNS At Risk

I also talked this over with a few people on my team: DOM events that are namespaced are nothing like their XML-namespace counterparts. Rather they are simply [opaque name] + [NS opaque name], which is identical to [opaque name + NS opaque name]. The only difference is that it's more confusing to authors and more complexity in implementation.

It would be IE's preference not to have to implement the NS methods.


-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of Jonas Sicking
Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2009 7:02 PM
To: Anne van Kesteren
Cc: Doug Schepers;
Subject: Re: Marked addEventListenerNS and removeEventListenerNS At Risk

On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Anne van Kesteren <> wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:39:58 +0200, Jonas Sicking <> wrote:
>> Finally, it doesn't seem like namespaced events even solves a real
>> problem. If you want to avoid naming conflicts you can call your
>> events "com.example.www.myEvent", or even
>> "".
> The latter would actually not work due to the NCName restrictions,
> though maybe that should be removed too to make this possible.

Yeah, that seems like a good idea.

For the record, I think I should fess up to being an advocate for the namespaced methods way back when we discussed it in Oslo in 2006. I believe Maciej was advocating for nuking the namespaced methods. I now believe that he was right and I was wrong :)

/ Jonas

Received on Sunday, 13 September 2009 06:45:45 UTC