- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 09:57:52 -0700
On Aug 4, 2011 5:31 PM, "Ryosuke Niwa" <rniwa at webkit.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk at opera.com> wrote: >> >> On Wed, 03 Aug 2011 23:40:27 +0200, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa at webkit.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk at opera.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> If they are identical I think it is even more clear we should remove the >>>> one on Document as it's redundant :-) >>> >>> >>> Mn... but I think it's more convenient to be able to access undoManager from document. Also, what if there were no body? undoManager needs to exist in such cases as well (e.g. designMode). >> >> >> <body> is not the root element. And if there is no root element there is nothing visible on the screen so I am not sure it matters if things are lost in that case. That is such an edge case and not really worth having an additional member on Document for. > > > Not sure. This happens all the time in design mode. We've had plenty of crash reports that only reproduce when there are no document element. > > It might also be hard to implement such a behavior in WebKit at least because documents / frames have the undo stack managed by OS X or embedders and having to fake non-existence of the undo stack might be tricky. Why treat documentElement specially here? Just make the documentElement *not* have a undoManager by default and have it just use it's ancestor's, just like all other elements. The document is an ancestor of the documentElement after all. / Jonas
Received on Friday, 5 August 2011 09:57:52 UTC