On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:34 AM, Jonas Sicking <jo...@sicking.cc> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Anne van Kesteren <ann...@annevk.nl> wrote: >> I think HTML should maintain the registry and policy for on* >> attributes insofar they concern Window/Document/HTMLElement objects. >> http://fullscreen.spec.whatwg.org/ only fires on Document, fwiw. > > That doesn't seem either scalable or documentation/implementation > friendly. It means that someone reading the X feature spec (to > implement it, to use it or to review it) will have to also go look at > the HTML spec. And know that he/she needs to do so. And it means that > the development of the X feature spec is blocked on getting the > attention of the HTML spec authors.
Well the other perspective is that someone looking to refactor event handlers (as has happened in e.g. Gecko in recent history) has just one place to look through. Currently HTML defines the allowfullscreen attribute too and how it interacts with the various other sandboxing features. Untangling that cleanly is hard and I do not think there is an obvious right way to do it. > Isn't this the reason we adding "partial interface" to WebIDL? One of the main reasons I recall was separating obsoleted features from non-obsoleted features in HTML. It is of course useful as well for self-contained extensions drafted elsewhere. I'm not sure that though that all the splintering is useful long term as you lose track of what is going on. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
