- From: Rick Waldron <waldron.rick@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 21:05:01 -0500
- To: "Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com" <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>, "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAHfnhfqLvcrB9=BYGR0spycT8PRd+LFqu-8GCJTJgeDeD2wp1w@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 7:37 PM, Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com < mtanalin@yandex.ru> wrote: > 03.12.2013, 04:04, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>: > > I find "new Element('h1',...)" less good to read than something like > > "HTML.h1(...)". (If you have a tagname in a string, you can always do > > HTML[tag](...).) > > As for `HTML.h1(...)` specifically, this is a potentially bad idea to have > a tag name as a method name. > > Tag name may typically be arbitrary and even unsupported by browser while > method names are usually predefined and cannot be arbitrary. > > Also, there is a risk that some tag name will eventually interfere with > some sensible method or property name. For example, if future HTML version > will add `length` element, `HTML.length` as an object property and > `HTML.length()` as a "constructor" method would have totally different > purpose/functionality and therefore be ambiguous/confusing. > > Actually, using tag names as method names is probably a _worst_ syntactic > idea I've heard of lately. > > >> It would also be consistent with already existing > web-developer-friendly constructors like `new Text` and `new Comment` > (implemented in Firefox 24+, Chrome 28+, and Opera 15+). > > > > Not really. There's a single type of Text node and Comment node. > > There are many significant types of Element nodes. This isn't a good > > way to slice up the functionality. > > If someone would like to use constructors like `new HTMLDivElement`, they > are free to do that. > > However, if we are talking about a really usable and non-error-prone > syntax, this probably shouldn't be the _only_ option. For me as a 10-years+ > experienced web-developer, `new Element(arbitraryTagName)` looks like a > more suitable option. > > Yes, and it's not just you--the "single function/constructor/method that accepts a string and produces a node" is a common pattern implemented by all major libraries: Y.Node.create("<div>"); jQuery("<div>"); dojo.create("div"); new Element("div"); new Ext.dom.Element("div"); Rick
Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2013 02:05:49 UTC