-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 289
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Event.composedPath() inconsistency between implementors. #1201
Comments
I think that's right. Would you be willing to add web-platform-tests coverage? Edit: there are some tests for |
I wonder which behavior is expected? Since the name |
Fair, might be good to wait a bit for others to chime in. In my mind this was always the event's path, but we didn't call it that because it had to be partially obscured in the presence of shadow trees. So I would expect Firefox's behavior and if we ever added the ability for userland (These days we would probably not add an API that so casually reveals open shadow trees however.) cc @smaug---- |
I’m unsure what about the name suggests that. While EventTargets constructed directly from user code never have a non-default “get the parent” algorithm presently, IndexedDB interfaces extending EventTarget do — an IDBRequest’s parent is an IDBTransaction and an IDBTransaction’s parent is an IDBDatabase. The usual bubbling behavior applies. As far as I can tell, In Chromium presently, I get an empty array. |
So should I open the issue in Chrome and Safari? |
For code
Chrome and Safari prints
[]
, Firefox prints[target]
https://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-event-composedpath
Per spec, it looks like Firefox is correct.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: