On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 1:48 AM, Jonas Sicking <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yup, that seems like the right solution. But we should specify exactly > what the UA should store. I.e. should it store the whole before/after > values?
That seems expensive. What should it do if the after-value doesn't match the current > value when the transaction is reverted? > Hm... so the only way this could happen is if script assigned a value to the value IDL attribute, so it's probably safe to say we should abort (i.e. no restoration of the value) - Ryosuke
