On 2011-09-21, at 1:00 AM, Antranig Basman wrote:

> On 20/09/2011 14:37, Cheetham, Anastasia wrote:
>> 
>> My question is this: Is this something we want to let integrators know 
>> about? Or do we actually want to prevent them from realizing that these 
>> functions technically implemented this way?
>> 
> 
> Hi AC - I would soft-pedal the lifecycle functions somewhat, ... So I would 
> not go overboard in delving into the implementation details in the 
> explanation. You can just refer the reader to the standard documentation on 
> events for these details (which will, in contrast, remain stable).

Ok, will do. Thanks.

> On a related note, we probably want to highly encourage users to supply 
> namespaces for standard listeners…

Good to know! I'll look into updating the event system docs (and any other 
relevant docs) to reinforce this. Thanks!

-- 
Anastasia Cheetham     Inclusive Design Research Centre
[email protected]            Inclusive Design Institute
                                        OCAD University

_______________________________________________________
fluid-work mailing list - [email protected]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
see http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work

Reply via email to