W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: ElementTraversal progress?

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 19:25:26 +0200
To: Webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Cc: "Web APIs WG" <public-webapi@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.uc7pcosbwxe0ny@widsith.local>

Followup to webapps group please (reply-to set for this mail)

On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 23:56:22 +0200, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:

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

>>> 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.
...
> In mozilla we would actually even implement the .childElementCount  
> property by keeping a hidden childNodes list internally. But that might  
> be specific to the mozilla implementation.

Indeed, it seems from discussing it that it would. Checking back with the  
implementor at Opera, we would prefer to leave the spec as it is for now,  
and if necessary write another, even smaller spec that offered the node  
list functionality if you really want it.

cheers

Chaals

-- 
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 Monday, 23 June 2008 17:26:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:26 GMT