- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 22:55:56 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: liorean <liorean@gmail.com>, "Web APIs WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>
On Tue, 30 May 2006, Jonas Sicking wrote: > > > > - Third, NodeLists being live means you cannot manually manipulate > > them. StaticNodeLists don't have this problem. Since they are not > > live, manipulation of them should not be a problem. This means array > > functionality such as sort, push, pop that would simply not make sense > > on a NodeList would make perfect sense on a StaticNodeList. > > I don't want us to define a new array when ECMAScript has a perfectly > good one. That is just a lot more work for everyone involved. > > What we could maybe do though is to return a real ECMAScript array. I > actually like this idea a lot since that'll integrate much better with > scripts than a StaticNodeList would. That makes a lot of sense. I support this. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 30 May 2006 22:56:05 UTC