[whatwg] This step must be skipped if the form has no onreceived attribute
jim.ley at gmail.com
Wed Jun 16 10:08:23 PDT 2004
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 16:56:21 +0000 (UTC), Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jun 2004, Jim Ley wrote:
> > I was going to stop the comments for now, but:
> > | Step seven: Dispatch the received event.
> > | This step must be skipped if the form has no onreceived attribute.
> > Was so awful I had to mention it... We can't use DOM events to add event
> > listeners, why not, it's utterly ridiculous...
> You can add event listeners -- you just have to make sure the attribute is
> present as well. This is required because otherwise in order to implement
> this, every time you submitted a form you would have to wait til you had
> completely parsed the new document before tearing down the old one, which
> is of course unacceptable. This way, the author has to give a clear sign
> (adding an attribute) that this is acceptable for him.
Why is the clear sign of having a listener for the event not
sufficient? What is the basic difference.
it seems rather ridiculous to go:
especially as then upon re-serialisation of the document the
onrecieved attribute is likely in the wrong state.
I'd encourage you to reconsider this.
More information about the whatwg