Closed lozandier closed 8 years ago
Thanks for your pull request. It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).
:memo: Please visit https://cla.developers.google.com/ to sign.
Once you've signed, please reply here (e.g. I signed it!
) and we'll verify. Thanks.
Thanks for your pull request. It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).
:memo: Please visit https://cla.developers.google.com/ to sign.
Once you've signed, please reply here (e.g. I signed it!
) and we'll verify. Thanks.
I signed it!
On Monday, December 28, 2015, googlebot notifications@github.com wrote:
Thanks for your pull request. It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).
[image: :memo:] Please visit https://cla.developers.google.com/ https://cla.developers.google.com/ to sign.
Once you've signed, please reply here (e.g. I signed it!) and we'll
verify. Thanks.
- If you've already signed a CLA, it's possible we don't have your GitHub username or you're using a different email address. Check your existing CLA data https://cla.developers.google.com/clas and verify that your email is set on your git commits https://help.github.com/articles/setting-your-email-in-git/.
- If you signed the CLA as a corporation, please let us know the company's name.
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/GoogleChrome/dialog-polyfill/pull/90#issuecomment-167618666 .
Kevin Lozandier lozandier@gmail.com lozandier@gmail.com
CLAs look good, thanks!
CLAs look good, thanks!
Friendly ping @samthor :)
Thanks for the contribution, but this doesn't seem to match the spec. Is there a change or spec update that I'm missing?
@samthor Ah, reading the spec before, it seems I was too sure to conflate the close event specified by close()
("Queue a task to fire a simple event named close
at subject") to the corresponding showModal
& open
events.
So it seems this can't be merged.
That said, how you recommend suggesting that WHATWG considers this? It seems intuitive in the long-run that such an event canonically exist; what's the W3C mailing list trail that lead for it to be originally omitted? Nonetheless, that's ultimately a tangent.
I'll close this PR if you have no objections.
Closed as not part of spec.
When the a dialog's
open
orshowModal
event is invoked, trigger an open event to correspond with the close event to comply w/ WHATWG expectations on how the dialog element should work. To not break the Principle of Least Surprise of the existing behavior of the Polyfill, the open event is only fired whenshow
&showModal
methods are explicitly used like how theclose
method currently behaves & differs from using the open attribute explicitly.Overall Side-effects
show
&showModal
methods are used.