- From: Michael A. Puls II <shadow2531@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 18:17:10 -0400
- To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>, public-html@w3.org
On Mon, 06 Apr 2009 17:33:58 -0400, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote: > On Mon, 06 Apr 2009 23:19:28 +0200, Michael A. Puls II > <shadow2531@gmail.com> wrote: >> 1. I don't really understand the part about there always being one >> element by definition and 'lists' and collections in this case. I don't >> really understand the first iframe case either. > > <iframe> is special cased because if there are multiple elements > matching the document[name] and one of them is <iframe> you would get > the <iframe> element itself back as part of the list and not a reference > to the global object of that element. So: document.a returns an HTMLCollection: <body> <img name="a"> <iframe name="a"> </body> where a[1] would be the IFRAME element. document.a returns the iframe as a window object: <body> <iframe name="a"> <img name="a"> </body> , instead of an HTMLCollection because the iframe (as a window object) can't exist in an HTMLCollection, so the iframe as the window object is favored. Is that what you mean? > That there is always one element follows from the list of values that > make up the "names of the supported named properties". The algorithm > would not be called at all otherwise, because there would not be a > property with that name. I see. I was thinking from a caller perspective and thought it was saying that document.<nomatch> would return at least one element instead of undefined. -- Michael
Received on Monday, 6 April 2009 22:17:50 UTC