Re: [whatwg] Load events fired during onload handlers

2012-11-29 Thread Ian Hickson
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012, James Graham wrote: There seems to be general agreement (amongst browsers, not yet the spec) that if a document does something that causes a new load event from within an onload handler (document.open/document.close) the second load event is not dispatched. This also

Re: [whatwg] Load events fired during onload handlers

2012-08-02 Thread Henri Sivonen
For what it's worth, I think the weirdness described in this thread is a good reason not to try to make DOMContentLoaded consistent with the load event for the sake of consistency. For one thing, the code that manages the weirdness of the load event lives in a different place compared to the code

Re: [whatwg] Load events fired during onload handlers

2012-07-31 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/30/12 12:02 PM, James Graham wrote: If desired, I can try to figure out exactly why there's only one load event on the first iframe there. Let me know. That would be really helpful. OK, I looked into this. There are two things going on: 1) Gecko fires the load event on the iframe as

[whatwg] Load events fired during onload handlers

2012-07-30 Thread James Graham
There seems to be general agreement (amongst browsers, not yet the spec) that if a document does something that causes a new load event from within an onload handler (document.open/document.close_ the second load event is not dispatched. This also applies to the load event on iframe elements

Re: [whatwg] Load events fired during onload handlers

2012-07-30 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/30/12 11:10 AM, James Graham wrote: I don't think I have a strong opinion about what should happen here, but the Gecko behaviour could be easier to implement, and the WebKit behaviour slightly safer (presumably the point of this anomaly is to prevent infinite loops in load event handers).

Re: [whatwg] Load events fired during onload handlers

2012-07-30 Thread James Graham
On 07/30/2012 05:44 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: On 7/30/12 11:10 AM, James Graham wrote: I don't think I have a strong opinion about what should happen here, but the Gecko behaviour could be easier to implement, and the WebKit behaviour slightly safer (presumably the point of this anomaly is to