Jim Ley wrote:
"Thomas DeWeese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jim Ley wrote:
"Thomas DeWeese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
It isn't clear to me which is the
lesser of the two evils - not firing the event, or firing the event with
the cloned instance as target.
Anyone willing to vote on this :)
Could you fire it on the USE?
This would be more difficult actually, and why would you want it?
The target is supposed to be the ElementInstance, I would consider our
'cloned' instance closer than the use element (which would lose all
information
about the actual element receiving the event).
because without an ElementInstance/correspondingUseElement we wouldn't be
able to get to the right document? etc. through parentNode etc. or is the
cloned tree still really there and navigable up the tree back into the real
tree?
Well no without the ElementInstance you can't get to the document
that the use element references. You can still navigate up the clone
tree using parentNode but you will find yourself eventually at the 'use'
element and the ownerDocument will the owner document of the 'use' element.
Of course firing the event on the 'use' element also wouldn't allow you
to get to the referenced document
> I'd rather see the event fire, than not, but I'm a little unsure
> about the whole ElementInstance interface anyway.
Well there are advantages and disadvantages - if you fire the event
people can do something, but you also run the risk of killing correct code
because the setup is not at all what they reasonably are expecting. I
don't think you are alone in the unsureness around the ElementInstance
interface.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
