Web Applications Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > ISSUE-6 (Element Traversal Nodelist): Should the ElementTraversal Interface Have a Nodelist? [Element Traversal] > > http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/ > > Raised by: Doug Schepers > On product: Element Traversal > > Daniel Glazman requested that a nodelist or item accessor be added to > the ET spec, in > <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapi/2008Mar/0226.html>, > spawning a long thread. > > Doug discussed the history of similar proposals, from himself, > Mozilla, and others in > <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapi/2008Mar/0246.html>. > > On the plus side, it would allow for discrete access to elements in > some use cases, and would be easy to implement for UAs that already > have a nodelist implementation. On the downside, it is heavier to > implement if the UA doesn't already have nodelist (such as some mobile > uses), and ET is already referenced by other specifications. One thing that I recently realized. Any UA that implements the HTML DOM must already have the code to implement a live nodelist of child elements with a given name. This is needed to implement the HTMLTableElement.rows, HTMLTableElement.tBodies and HTMLTableRowElement.cells properties. So it seems like it should be easy to reuse that code to implement a .childElements list. That is exactly what the implementation in mozilla would do. / JonasReceived on Tuesday, 17 June 2008 23:21:46 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:34:39 GMT