- From: David Faure <david@mandrakesoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 00:03:13 +0100
- To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Cc: www-dom-ts@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 26 November 2002 23:51, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote: > On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 16:29, David Faure wrote: > > Most of the failing table tests are due to the section reordering issue. I sent > > a mail to this list about it, but it remained unanswered. The subject line was > > "Order of table sections". I would be glad if this could trigger some discussion :) > > Looking at [1], it appeared that this issue was closed at: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2002OctDec/0044.html This sounds like a different issue to me. The above is only about the rowIndex property, whereas the concern I'm raising here (and in [1]) is the fact that the testsuite uses constructs like document.getElementsByTagName("tr").item(4). > It seemed like Mozilla and IE are following the same behavior here. > (In case this issue needs a follow-up, I set the reply-to www-dom@w3.org > given that this is an issue on the draft, and not the test suite). I believe it's an issue with the test suite only. > > I feel that relying on the browser's internal ordering of the table sections > > in the DOM tree is wrong. ... and more precisely, that rows should be found by ID, or by actually using rowIndex, but NOT using document.getElementsByTagName("tr").item(4), which is rather fragile IMHO. - -- David FAURE, david@mandrakesoft.com, faure@kde.org http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~david/ Contributing to: http://www.konqueror.org/, http://www.koffice.org/ Get the latest KOffice - http://download.kde.org/stable/koffice-1.2/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE94/2x72KcVAmwbhARAohJAKCVr/WHN73izaVeCdNfFk1AWvXA4wCaAoNU RCMw++NMAeNZI4ibXZOesvk= =QSPV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Tuesday, 26 November 2002 18:03:20 UTC