On Tue, 8 Apr 2014, at 8:37, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Mon, 7 Apr 2014, Marcos Caceres wrote: > > On March 20, 2014 at 2:30:55 PM, Marcos Caceres ([email protected]) wrote: > > > On March 20, 2014 at 12:58:44 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > > > > Agreed. The exact target isn't very important here, and so being > > > > consistent with legacy event firing for the same system is probably > > > > a good idea. > > > > > > Agree. Let's go with consistency, even though it feels a bit weird. > > > > Ian, would it be possible to have some kind of hook in HTML to give us > > this behaviour for free? > > > > That is, given an event handler IDL attribute on some interface, we get > > the HTML attribute equivalent on body element (all wired up and ready to > > be used). That would be useful in that we wouldn't need to define the > > HTML onorientationchange attribute in the Orientation Lock spec (and all > > future specs). This could really help with consistency. > > I'm very happy to add any such attributes to the HTML spec, just file a > bug once you're confident that it won't change.
When we will be in LC and close to CR, I will file a bug to remove the monkey patching I am doing on the HTML spec. -- Mounir
