Re: [Selectors API 2] Is matchesSelector stable enough to unprefix in implementations?

Yehuda Katz
(ph) 718.877.1325


On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Sean Hogan <shogun70@westnet.com.au> wrote:

> On 23/11/11 12:17 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>
>> On 11/22/11 6:50 AM, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
>>
>>> Last time we had this discussion, you had a desire to keep the name
>>> prefixed until the refNodes and :scope stuff was implemented [1]. What's
>>> the status on that now?
>>>
>>
>> The status is that I've given up on the :scope discussion reaching a
>> conclusion in finite time (esp. because it sounds like people would like to
>> change what it means depending on the name of the function being called)
>> and would be quite happy to ship an implementation that only takes one
>> argument.  Web pages can use .length on the function to detect support for
>> the two-argument version if that ever happens.
>>
>>
> Are there any issues with:
>
> - If you want to use selectors with explicit :scope then you use
> querySelector / querySelectorAll / matchesSelector.
>
> - If you want to use selectors with :scope implied at the start of each
> selector in the selector list (as most js libs currently do) then you use
> find / findAll / matches.
>
>
> The alternative option (find / findAll / matches can accept explicit
> :scope, but will otherwise imply :scope) seems to be where all the
> ambiguity lies.


What exact cases are ambiguous with "find/findAll/matches can accept
explicit :scope, but will otherwise imply :scope"?


>
> Sean
>
>
>
>