This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 21490 - [Custom]: Some attributes of HTMLElementElement should be read-only
Summary: [Custom]: Some attributes of HTMLElementElement should be read-only
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: WebAppsWG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: HISTORICAL - Component Model (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC All
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Dimitri Glazkov
QA Contact: public-webapps-bugzilla
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks: 18719
  Show dependency tree / graph
 
Reported: 2013-04-01 09:32 UTC by Morrita Hajime
Modified: 2013-05-15 21:08 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:

Attachments

Description Morrita Hajime 2013-04-01 09:32:31 UTC 
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/spec/custom/index.html#the-element-element

> interface HTMLElementElement : HTMLElement {
>    attribute DOMString constructorName;
>    attribute DOMString extends;
>    attribute DOMString name;
>    readonly attribute Function generatedConstructor;
>};

|constructorName|, |extends| and |name| are declared as mutable attributes.
They should be readonly since there is no such semantics for
dynamically changing these.
Also, document.register() doesn't provide any imperative alternative for them.
Comment 1 Dimitri Glazkov 2013-05-15 21:02:55 UTC 
Since these will just be reflecting HTML attributes, I don't think we need to make any special provisions for them. The fact that <element> is a one-shot shouldn't be dictating how these attributes are defined. For example, you can change HTMLScripElement.src all you want, but you'll get no useful result.
Comment 2 Dimitri Glazkov 2013-05-15 21:08:41 UTC 
(In reply to comment #0)
> Also, document.register() doesn't provide any imperative alternative for
> them.

That's okay. The layering goes the other way around: declarative stuff builds on imperative.