Good point, Norm. Thanks for the feedback. Clearly I need to think about this API more, because as you point out, what I have so far is too confusing.
I'm open to better suggestions! On 2010-02-17, at 14:54, Norman Klein wrote: > I think this API is attempting to have things both ways and as a > result, its confusing. The attributes need to work in a single manner. > According to this email, the 'name' attribute operates in different > ways depending on the presence of the 'event' attribute. This allows > confusing situations like this to occur: > > <handler name="oninit" event="null"> > ... > </handler> > <handler name="oninit"> > ... > </handler> > > According to the API, this confusing mess would be legal as the first > handler only has the name "oninit", while the second handler only > handles "oninit" events and doesn't have a name, so there's no name > conflict. >
