- From: Trevor Rowbotham <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 13:22:08 -0800
- To: whatwg/dom <dom@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Received on Monday, 2 November 2020 21:22:21 UTC
Wouldn't removing the "not" in the first step defeat the whole purpose of these steps? If you remove it, then we return early when toBeRemovedNode is an inclusive ancestor of reference, which means reference would still point to a node that has now been removed from the tree, right? -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/907#issuecomment-720731680
Received on Monday, 2 November 2020 21:22:21 UTC