- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 20:46:27 +0000 (UTC)
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Rick Waldron <waldron.rick@gmail.com>, Tim Down <timdown@gmail.com>
- Cc: whatwg@whatwg.org, benjamin.poulain@nokia.com, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
- Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1206292043330.30734@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > > So I guess we have to make a decision for the platform here. > > > > Do we want: > > > > - To spec window.find() in all its historical glory, and have it > > implemented everywhere? > > > > - To spec a subset of window.find() that just does the use case described > > above, namely to destructively change the selection to a matching part > > of the DOM so that it can be manipulated by script? > > > > - To spec a new API that just returns matching ranges and then allows > > those ranges to be manipulated like the selection can be today? > > > > - To encourage authors to write a library that does this for them, and > > not bother to provide a dedicated API at all? > > > > Which would implementations that don't do the full window.find() today be > > willing to do? > > As far as I know, we (google) would prefer to do nothing with > window.find(), so we can use it for the Selectors API. No opinion on > whether the functionality is useful under another name. On Wed, 15 Feb 2012, Rick Waldron wrote: > > +1 to TJ's mention of find for use in the Selector API: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/0277.html On Thu, 16 Feb 2012, Tim Down wrote: > > For what it's worth as author of a small library currently working on > implementing something like this feature, I have no love for > window.find(), even if it were consistently implemented in browsers. I > would prefer the use case I described to be met by a different API, > which would ideally provide node-independent text-based > creation/mutation of Ranges, with features similar to those provided by > Microsoft's TextRange. Given the lack of interest in the feature, I have removed it from the spec and recommend to implementors that they drop support for the API. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 29 June 2012 20:46:57 UTC