On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
wrote:
> Not necessarily. It depends what exactly it means for a selector to
contain
> :scope for determining whether or not to enable the implied :scope
> behaviour. Consider:
>
> foo.find(":not(:scope)");
Ooh, this is an interesting case too. So here's the full list of cases which
we need defined behavior for (again looking at Alex and Yehuda here).
In the following DOM
<body id="3">
<div id=0></div>
<div id="context" foo=bar>
<div id=1></div>
<div class="class" id=2></div>
<div class="withChildren" id=3><div class=child id=4></div></div>
</div>
<div id=5></div>
<div id=6></div>
</body>
What would each of the following .findAll calls return. I've included my
guessed based on the discussions so far:
var e = document.getElementById('context');
e.findAll("div") // returns ids 1,2,3,4
e.findAll("") // returns an empty list
e.findAll("#3") // returns id 3, but not the body node
e.findAll("> div") // returns ids 1,2,3
e.findAll("[foo=bar]") // returns nothing
e.findAll("[id=1]") // returns id 1
e.findAll(":first-child") // returns id 1
e.findAll("+ div") // returns id 5
e.findAll("~ div") // returns id 5, 6
e.findAll(":scope")
e.findAll("div:scope")
e.findAll("[foo=bar]:scope")
e.findAll(":scope div")
e.findAll("div:scope div")
e.findAll("div:scope #3")
e.findAll("body > :scope > div")
e.findAll("div, :scope")
e.findAll("body > :scope > div, :scope")
e.findAll(":not(:scope)")
/ Jonas
Received on Friday, 21 October 2011 07:42:33 UTC