Jon Ferraiolo wrote:
Here is what I am seeing:
From the XBL2 spec:
------------
Bindings attached through CSS must only remain on the bound element as
long as the element continues to match the style rule. If at any time a
resolution of style on the element determines that a different binding
should be attached, the old binding (and all bindings that it explicitly
extends in its _explicit inheritance chain_
<http://www.w3.org/TR/xbl/#explicit1>) must be detached.
------------
This only talks about bindings attached using CSS though. Not bindings
attached using the element attribute or the .addBinding function.
In the case of a clone, if there is a <foo> element that gets cloned and
if there is a <binding element="foo"> or a style declaration for "foo"
which applies a binding, then dynamic reapplication of bindings would
cause the cloned foo element to have the given binding attached to it.
So, the clone would get its own binding, its own separately built shadow
tree, along with invocation of xblBindingAttached() and things like that.
Yes, that is probably how I would interpret the spec now, although it's
not very explicit. This is Option A in my original email. However just
leaving it at that I think would be a severe limitation on what you
could implement using XBL2 since you couldn't keep any private state
while still working with .clone().
/ Jonas
