Initialize nestedHide variable in the "hide a popover" algorithm
#9419
Conversation
source
Outdated
| <li><p>Let <var>nestedHide</var> be false.</p></li> | ||
|
|
||
| <li><p>If <var>element</var>'s <span>popover showing or hiding</span> is true, then set | ||
| <var>nestedHide</var> to true.</p></li> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's combine these two steps as
Let nestedHide be true if element's popover showing or hiding is true; otherwise false.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@annevk: Let nestedHide be the value of element's popover showing or hiding flag instead?
That flag isn't explicitly defined as a flag (https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#popover-showing-or-hiding), but it should be.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh right, in that case it can be
Let nestedHide be element's popover showing or hiding.
I think.
(We're moving away from calling things flags and use the boolean type instead.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(We're moving away from calling things flags and use the boolean type instead.)
Thanks, TIL.
Added 's value, for the rationale see the commit message.
…hub.com:mbrodesser-Igalia/html into hide_popover_algo_nested_hide_set_initial_value
…its flag Initializing `nestedHide` hide with the value makes it clear that it's not a reference to `popover showing or hiding`.
| <li><p>If <var>element</var>'s <span>popover showing or hiding</span> is true, then set | ||
| <var>nestedHide</var> to true.</p></li> | ||
| <li><p>Let <var>nestedHide</var> be <var>element</var>'s <span>popover showing or | ||
| hiding</span>'s value.</p></li> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why would we need "'s value" here but not in the step above?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"document" has to represent a reference to the node document, not a copy.
"nestedHide" has to be a copy of "popover showing or hiding". Changing the latter in step 4 shouldn't change the former.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should probably be better about documenting this in Infra, but we generally follow JS semantics so a copy would be implied here due to it holding a primitive type.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Okay, will remove "value" then.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should probably be better about documenting this in Infra, but we generally follow JS semantics so a copy would be implied here due to it holding a primitive type.
For the record, there's whatwg/infra#139 for it.
The standard follows the JS semantics, so a copy of the primitive is implied.
Fixes #9412.
/popover.html ( diff )