It's not confusing at all. It's the same thing your sample code does. In all three of your examples, the handler is bound to whatever scope widget is in. The code is functionally identical to your examples.

Edit: Okay, I see what you're doing; attach is supposed to be invoked with a bound scope, which does change the binding. So yeah, my code won't work in your example. I'd argue that that's more of a lack-of-context problem in the example though, since it's dependent on knowledge of the usage of the attach() function to know that that binding behavior isn't desired. Given the context of the example, I contend my solution was acceptable. :)

Fat arrow there is still functionally equivalent to $.proxy.