- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:20:21 -0700
- To: Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
Web Applications Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > ISSUE-6 (Element Traversal Nodelist): Should the ElementTraversal Interface Have a Nodelist? [Element Traversal] > > http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/ > > Raised by: Doug Schepers > On product: Element Traversal > > Daniel Glazman requested that a nodelist or item accessor be added to > the ET spec, in > <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapi/2008Mar/0226.html>, > spawning a long thread. > > Doug discussed the history of similar proposals, from himself, > Mozilla, and others in > <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapi/2008Mar/0246.html>. > > On the plus side, it would allow for discrete access to elements in > some use cases, and would be easy to implement for UAs that already > have a nodelist implementation. On the downside, it is heavier to > implement if the UA doesn't already have nodelist (such as some mobile > uses), and ET is already referenced by other specifications. One thing that I recently realized. Any UA that implements the HTML DOM must already have the code to implement a live nodelist of child elements with a given name. This is needed to implement the HTMLTableElement.rows, HTMLTableElement.tBodies and HTMLTableRowElement.cells properties. So it seems like it should be easy to reuse that code to implement a .childElements list. That is exactly what the implementation in mozilla would do. / Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 17 June 2008 23:21:46 UTC