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

[whatwg] Early feedback on header association algorithm

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 10:25:38 -0800
Message-ID: <6C2BF167-8A21-487D-88F2-3DEE1D2DE40A@apple.com>

On Dec 5, 2008, at 7:09 AM, Aaron Leventhal wrote:

> How about node.getElementByIdInSubtree?

In other cases where a getElement[s]By method is available on both  
Document and other nodes, it has the same name in both cases  
(getElementsByTagName, getElementsByClassName).

Regards,
Maciej

>
>
> 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 10:25:38 UTC

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