- From: Glen Huang <curvedmark@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 21:54:08 +0800
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
before/after/replaceWith behave the same in this case is just a side effect of DOM trying to be less surprising and more symmetrical for the curious ones. I doubt most people would even aware they behave the same in this case. Whenever the user cases come, I believe most people will just use replaceWith. > On Jan 27, 2015, at 8:51 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: >> In general I agree that it feels unintuitive that you can't replace a node >> with a collection which includes the node itself. So the extra line or two >> of code seems worth it. > > You don't think it's weird that before/after/replaceWith all end up > doing the same for that scenario? Perhaps it's okay... > > > -- > https://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 27 January 2015 13:54:41 UTC