- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 12:47:44 -0500
- To: Sean Hogan <shogun70@westnet.com.au>
- CC: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, public-webapps@w3.org
On 11/23/11 5:38 PM, Sean Hogan wrote:
> - 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.
I'm not sure that for matches() the :scope thing is all that relevant.
:matches() just returns a boolean for whether the |this| it's invoked on
matches the selector. The only reason one would ever use :scope in
there at all is if one provides an explicit list of reference nodes,
right? In particular, the assumption is that the selector passed in
would obviously be allowed to match ancestor nodes of |this| for parts
of it, since otherwise there is no point, right? No one would expect
foo.matches("div *");
to always return false; you would expect it to return true if |foo| has
an _ancestor_ matching "div".
Similarly, no one would expect this:
foo.matchs(" > div");
to do much of anything, I would think. Or am I wrong on that?
Am I just missing something here?
-Boris
Received on Thursday, 24 November 2011 17:48:19 UTC