- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 12:27:43 +0300
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: "Web APIs WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>
On Apr 2, 2008, at 00:48, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > OK. So item() would be available on Element after casting it to > NodeList in those implementations. I guess you're saying that the > cast would not longer be unambiguous if there were multiple > NodeLists that might make sense? So childElements couldn't be > implemented with a |return this;|? > > That doesn't seem like such a terrible implementation burden to me, > to be honest... I'm not claiming it would be awfully hard, but it does change the impact of Element Traversal from adding four or five methods on an existing class (mere code footprint; super-simple) to adding more run- time object instances. And then, there are issues like should childElements return the same object every time. And if yes, then the implementor needs to add a new pointer to each element node or to add a hashtable on the owner document or something along those lines. Again, not awfully hard, but still more complex than just adding convenience methods on an existing class. And to what end? To use indexing instead of list-style iteration. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Wednesday, 2 April 2008 09:28:30 UTC