W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > December 2008

[whatwg] Early feedback on header association algorithm

From: Aaron Leventhal <aaronlev@moonset.net>
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 16:09:59 +0100
Message-ID: <49394447.5040101@moonset.net>
How about node.getElementByIdInSubtree?

On 12/2/2008 4:07 PM, timeless wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:39 AM, Aaron Leventhal<aaronlev at moonset.net>  wrote:
>    
>> Maybe there is a deeper problem if copy&  paste doesn't work right because
>> of IDs?
>>
>> Or maybe there should be a node.getDescendantById() method?
>>      
>
> maybe, but not with that name.
>
>   Results 1 - 10 of about 4,480,000 for Descendent [definition]. (0.22 seconds)
>   Results 1 - 10 of about 8,370,000 for Descendant [definition]. (0.41 seconds)
>
> the wikipedia links are confusing enough
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descendant links to:
> http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/descendent
> which has an also link to http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/descendant
> which has a 'US' audio file
>
> So the web says that '-dant' is favored 2:1 over '-dent', which is a
> fairly bad margin considering the spelling errors we've seen in
> html/http.
>
> I'd sooner see Node.getElementById and risk the confusion of it
> returning fewer nodes than Document.getElementById.
>
>
>    
Received on Friday, 5 December 2008 07:09:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:46 UTC