- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:40:38 -0400
- To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- CC: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 4/13/11 5:43 AM, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
> I didn't think so, but then perhaps I misunderstand what the spec means
> by a native object. ECMAScript defines a native object as
>
> "object in an ECMAScript implementation whose semantics are fully
> defined by this specification rather than by the host environment."
>
> So that would include things like Array, String, etc.
Ineed.
> I don't think NodeList fits that definition, since it's provided by the host
> environment, not ECMAScript.
That's correct.
> I also thought something like this would not be a native object either:
>
> function init() {
> ...
> }
> var x = new init();
That's a native object; the behavior of that set of operations is
completely defined by the ES spec.
> JQuery more or less does that to create an object with custom
> properties, and then basically uses Array.prototype.push.apply(x, elms)
> to add the collection to that object.
Right; jquery's got native objects there.
> It's nice so that cases where authors try to pass in an array of things
> that aren't nodes are handled well. The other alternative is just to
> accept a collection of anything, and iterate through it to find all the
> Element nodes, ignoring everything else. I don't see any reason to
> prefer the latter approach.
I would really prefer we not do the latter.
-Boris
Received on Thursday, 14 April 2011 18:41:07 UTC