Awesome!

I think this fix has regressed. (Too bad a unit test wasn't possible…) If a target doesn't listen in _findEventTargets it will skip it but continue to the parent, thus implicitly bubbling, even if the event is in nonBubblingEvents. I can write up an example to reproduce, if you want.

I can write up an example to reproduce, if you want.

Would be very nice, thanks! You can use http://playground-leaflet.rhcloud.com/ for that :)

For the record, it's now possible to set relatedTarget in happen, since tmcw/happen#17

Related: Leaflet/prosthetic-hand#9

Here you go: http://playground-leaflet.rhcloud.com/damu/1/edit?html,output

There is a click event bound to the map which prints to the console. Clicking on either marker should not trigger that event, because the default options of Marker include nonBubblingEvents to include click (among other events). However, if you click on the top marker (which does not have a popup bound), it still fires. This is exactly the bug that this PR originally fixed.

Thanks!

I'm not sure this is a bug actually. Some details:

• this PR was about preventing mouseout and mouseover to be targeted on parent elements of the original target
• nonBubblingEvents means not firing events on parents of an element if this element actually caught the event
• in your example, topMarker is not listening for click, thus the event is sent to the map
• if you don't want the map to received the event, you need to catch it on the marker and stop it: topMarker.on('click', L.DomEvent.stop);

Hope this makes sense! :)

Ah, if this is intentional then that's fine, but it still doesn't seem great to me that just setting an event handler has the side effect of preventing bubbling.

I would expect people to be confused by this, especially because the browser's bubbling does not work like this. For example, you don't have to call topMarker.on('click', L.DomEvent.stop);, it also prevents bubbling when you do topMarker.on('click', function() {});. I did not expect that.

If you do want to keep this behaviour, I'd suggest adding some comments in the code to clarify that this is how it's supposed to work (right now this is the only comment as far as I can tell). And perhaps something about this in the documentation, too.

For example, you don't have to call topMarker.on('click', L.DomEvent.stop);, it also prevents bubbling when you do topMarker.on('click', function() {});. I did not expect that.

See #3605 (comment) for more context about this design decision. I agree that this needs to be somewhere in the doc.

Yeah, that makes sense, this would be a significant breaking change. I suppose both solutions have some element of surprise in them. Perhaps it would also help if we wouldn't call this stuff "bubbling", since that implies things work similar to DOM bubbling. I don't have good alternatives though.

Anyway, thanks for your quick responses and providing context!