- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 16:20:25 +0200
- To: "Jim Ley" <jim@jibbering.com>
- Cc: "Web APIs WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 15:45:21 +0100, Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com> wrote: >> Fair enough, here are the requirements for the name: >> >> * short >> * simple > > Why are these requirements for the name, no other DOM names are short > and simple, they're clear and unambiguous, I'd say they were the > requirements. If people want to use shorter names they understand in > their closed world the $x() approach is perfectly simple for them > (although discouraged by ECMA of course). This has been noted as an open issue. >> The reason is performance. > > Then one 1 method with an optional limit is ,uch better, it optimises > for all situations when the author knows how many they're interested in, > rather than 1 special case. I don't see why the 1 case is that much > more special than the N case - as I say gEBI meets most of the 1 cases. The 1 case returns a Node as opposed to a StaticNodeList. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Sunday, 14 May 2006 14:20:39 UTC