Re: [xml] Feature request: callbacks

On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Daniel Veillard wrote:

Isn't this feature part of DOM2 Mutation Events ? What's the reason why it
should be part of the node tree api ?

  Dohhh ... right

  What freaks me is the following:

"The EventTarget interface is implemented by all Nodes in an implementation
 which supports the DOM Event Model."

Which is clearly something I try to avoid (changing all node data structures
to add more stuff in them). I'm not sure I want to go there, I think the
DOM events were implemented on top of libxml (Raph Levien used them for
gill) without adding something specific.

The initial need for those callbacks cames from the use of _private, i.e. 
the application reserved pointer in the Node structure. Seems to me that
if there is really a need to stick to the DOM interface then this can (and is
) done with _private and in this case the DOM event registration can be
implemented at this layer with minimal penatly for all the other users of
I agree with you, mutation events belong to DOM implementations. The only
usefull callback is to avoid memory leak caused by the use of _private.
In my opinion the problem is memory leak not events.
Dealing with events is a DOM problem.

Paolo Casarini - casarini cs unibo it

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]