- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 14:10:06 -0800
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.org>, public-script-coord@w3.org
On Feb 23, 2010, at 2:49 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 02:22:12 +0100, Maciej Stachowiak > <mjs@apple.com> wrote: >> The other alternatives involve creating some parallel API, along one >> of the following lines: >> >> foo.style.topValue.px = 200 >> foo.style.topPX = 200 >> foo.styleValues.top.px = 200 >> >> Of these options, I think the last one is probably the best, because >> it's easy to feature-test for from script. The only problem is that >> "styleValues" is kind of a bad name. I'm sure there are better >> possibilities though. > > I guess we should do something like that then. > > I personally think a new member on CSSStyleDeclaration would be > better so we do not need to introduce a whole new series of > accessors. Thoughts? Good point, that would also make it work with getComputedStyle and the like. So something like: foo.style.values.top.px foo.style.properties.top.px This does mean one extra property access compare to foo.style.top.px, and two more compared to foo.style.top. However, for repeated style access an author could (presumably) save foo.style.properties in a variable and just do properties.top.px. Regards, Maciej
Received on Tuesday, 23 February 2010 22:10:40 UTC