W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > June 2008

Re: ElementTraversal progress?

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2008 02:21:41 +0200
To: "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "Web APIs WG" <public-webapi@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.ub1nafb4wxe0ny@widsith.local>

On Sat, 31 May 2008 01:05:44 +0200, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:

> Hi WebAPI fans!



> I wanted to implement the ElementTraversal spec for the next release of  
> firefox (after FF3). However last I heard there was still an outstanding  
> issue of if we wanted to have .childElementCount unsigned long or if we  
> wanted a .childElements NodeList.

I guess Doug will pipe up soon, but as I understand things from him he  
thinks it makes sense to leave the spec as is. Opera, Ikivo and BitFlash  
are known to have implementations that are believed to be conformant to  
the current spec.

> It would be great to have this resolved pretty soon. The development  
> cycle for our next release is quite short so if we want to add  
> ElementTraversal to the release we would ideally like to see it more  
> stable pretty soon.
> As before I'm still of the opinion that a .childElements NodeList would  
> be a better solution. While I agree that it can be more complex to  
> implement, I still think that the value vs. cost ratio still is quite  
> good.

One of the issues involved in a new, more complicated solution is  
precisely the one of stabilising the spec relatively quickly. Personally I  
think it seems better to go with what we have right now, and look at  
adding more in a seperate piece of work, so as to stabilise and finish the  



Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals   Try Opera 9.5: http://snapshot.opera.com
Received on Sunday, 1 June 2008 00:22:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:27 UTC