On 22/lug/09, at 14:04, Mike Schrag wrote:
>> Wouldn't it be useful to have something like an "other" binding that
>> gets passed transparently into the link?
> i think adding ondblclick is not a big deal ... i don't like "other"
> -- it would be completely non-standard to do this. submit a bug/
> for the pass-throughs you would like and we can add those.
I agree that "other" is pretty ugly, but giving a precise list of the
passthroughs would be as ugly as well.
One day you need something, the day after you need something else.
> we could maybe do something like the html core components do and
> pass through
> anything we don't understand, though I'm not sure I like that (from
> grander perspective of validating bindings, i'm not a fan of 'anything
If I may allow a suggestion, I would add a call to a 'protected'
method inside the appendToResponse() right in the spot where you are
adding the passthroughs. This has the benefit of not requiring future
updates. Those interested in a non standard tag can simply subclass
and override only that to add whatever they want.
Currently for instance AjaxHightlight has a bunch of private fields
that are referenced throughout the appendToResponse() code. This makes
it impossible to subclass as you need to also add the same bunch of
fields in your code. That messes things even more since you can't call
super() anymore cause you would fill in the super fields and so on...
Where to go for requests?