- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 14:05:20 -0700
- To: Scott González <scott.gonzalez@gmail.com>
- Cc: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Scott González <scott.gonzalez@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:45 PM, François REMY > <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com> wrote: >> >> If we add "matchesSelector" as an official alias to "matches" the same way >> "querySelector" and "querySelectorAll" will be aliases to "query" and >> "queryAll" soon, it should be possible to drop the prefixed version. This is >> possible, according to my definition of possible. > > Sorry about this being off-topic, but since query() keeps coming up as a > comparison, I think this is a relevant question: > > query() and queryAll() are going to be aliases? I thought the new names were > being created to fix the mismatch between how web developers think and how > querySelector() works, specifically only matching from within the context. No, they're not aliases - I think maybe François got confused. They are indeed different functions, much closer to jQuery's .find() method. ~TJ
Received on Monday, 16 September 2013 21:06:07 UTC