- From: Joćo Eiras <joao.eiras@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 21:18:39 -0000
- To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: "Web APIs WG" <public-webapi@w3.org>
Then a entire document for specifying a single method seems awkward :p For me, having a method to return only one element seems almost useless, so I'd suggest to have another method in the Element interface to say if it matches a single selector, as previous mentioned in this mailling list, so the document can have a little more "substance". matchesSelector() seems a nice name. Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> escreveu: > > Given the input from Björn I suppose there's no real need for a method > that returns a single element node (assuming implementations make that > optimization). Given that, I propose we rename .getAll() to > .getElementsBySelector() and drop .get() (on both Document and Element). > > One advantage is that it's consistent with the naming people already use > for custom written functions that have this functionality. In theory > it's also not harder to type than .getElementsByTagName(). The only > thing that makes it differ from the other getElementsBy* method(s) is > that it doesn't return a live NodeList. I don't see that as a major > problem. > > If there are no strong objections I'll implement this in the > specification. > >
Received on Sunday, 28 January 2007 21:18:49 UTC