- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 17:52:42 -0800
- To: Erik Arvidsson <arv@chromium.org>
- Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>, www-dom@w3.org, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Erik Arvidsson <arv@chromium.org> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 15:40, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: >> Note, I don't think that anyone is suggesting to add >> .parentNode/.eventTargetParent to the EventTarget interface. But >> rather just to objects instantiated through the constructor described >> in this thread. > > FWIW, some JS libraries have custom EventTarget implementations and > they use parentEventTarget as a way to determine how to do the > propagation. > > One problem with only allowing the parent in the constructor is that > it becomes read only. Most use cases for custom EventTargets that > involve propagation also requires being able to reparent that objects. Cool, so if people are doing this already, with modifyable .parentEventTarget, then I think we should do that. Allowing it to be modified is really only a matter of checking for cycles the the property is assigned to. / Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2012 01:53:40 UTC