On Thu, 7 Dec 2006, Cameron McCormack wrote: > > 3 Binding Attachment and Detachment > > I think the discussion of when bindings are attached or detached in > relation to runnings scripts is unclear. Is it describing that as soon > as, for example, the binding’s element attribute is mutated, bindings > are attached/detached, and then control continues on to the script > directly after the expression that caused the mutation?
Yes. > Perhaps a concrete example here would help clarify. Done. > When it becomes known that a binding is to be detached, it must happen > such that to any running scripts it appears that the binding was > removed immediately, except if the script in question is running as > part of the last step of the binding attachment process, in which case > the detachment happens after all the bindings being attached have had > their methods called. > > Should that be “…the last step of the binding detachment process…”? No, why would it be? -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
