- From: <keshlam@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 17:54:21 -0500
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@fas.harvard.edu>
- cc: www-dom@w3.org
>Am I correct to assume that when splitText() is called on a >CDATASection node, the return value (new node created) should be a >CDATASection node rather than a simple Text node? Good question, and good catch. Given that we've now moved splitText down to characterData -- which is also the ancestor of Comment -- I think I agree that the description needs to be updated. And I think you're probably right about the implication that split should create another node of the same type as the node which is being split. (Just checked my Level 1 implementation, and I didn't special-case this for CDATASections; they just inherited Text's version, which generated a Text node for the second half. That did meet the spec, but...) ______________________________________ Joe Kesselman / IBM Research
Received on Monday, 1 November 1999 17:54:35 UTC