This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
The following event types are exposed only as IDL attributes, but nowhere as content attributes: On ApplicationCache interface: oncached onchecking ondownloading onnoupdate onobsolete onupdateready On TextTrackCue interface: onenter onexit The following event type is exposed neither as an IDL attribute nor a content attribute: DOMContentLoaded All other event types appear either as both an IDL attribute and a content attribute (on at least one element type). Is this asymmetry intended? If so, then perhaps it should be explicitly noted in the definition of the above events. This comment is in reference to Editor's Draft of 11 July 2011.
mass-move component to LC1
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Did Not Understand Request Change Description: no spec change Rationale: What element would they be on? I don't really understand. DOMContentLoaded is a special case due to legacy. I wouldn't worry too much about it.
The intent of this bug report is to point out an asymmetry between expressing event handlers declaratively (as content attributes) and procedurally (as IDL attributes). With the exception of the event handlers listed in this bug, all event handlers can be expressed either declaratively or procedurally. In order to improve interoperability (and reduce exceptional conditions for authors), I recommend that content attributes be added (to their respective elements) for each of the event handlers listed here. For example, the event handlers defined on ApplicationCache could be exposed as content attributes on the html element (where the manifest attribute would be expressed) or on the body element. If the decision is not to add corresponding content attributes, then it would be useful to express somewhere in the spec that not all event handlers have both content attribute and IDL attribute definitions.
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: Content event handler attributes only make sense for events that fire through elements (and for historical reasons, events that fire on Window, which are magically mapped to <body>).