- From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 12:55:21 +0000
- To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Cc: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
On Sunday, 11 December 2011 at 12:21, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Fri, 09 Dec 2011 19:51:48 +0100, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com (mailto:glenn@skynav.com)> wrote: > > If the answer is that no item() method is implied, then does the use of > > sequence<T> in these newer specs entail dropping this method (with > > respect to prior DOM specs)? > > > > The DOM specifications probably need to move back to using interface > rather than sequence. I was hoping sequence would define the whole > collection thing magically, but it never turned out that way. Still not > quite sure what the real use case is for sequence. > I'm also unsure as to the purpose of sequence in practice. Perhaps some examples of expected usage would help a bit?
Received on Sunday, 11 December 2011 12:56:31 UTC