W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > January to March 2015

Re: Defining a constructor for Element and friends

From: Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 11:00:03 -0800
Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
Message-id: <5937EC9B-DD05-40C7-B9E8-0419D4A40B27@apple.com>
To: Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me>
On Jan 13, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me> wrote:

> From: Ryosuke Niwa [mailto:rniwa@apple.com] 
>> Or, we could always throw an exception in the constructor of HTMLUnknownElement so that nobody could do it.  It would mean that libraries and frameworks that do support custom elements without "-" would have to use document.createElement but that might be a good thing since they wouldn't be doing that in the first place.
> That kind of breaks the design goal that we be able to explain how everything you see in the DOM was constructed. How did the parser (or document.createElement(NS)) create a HTMLUnknownElement, if the constructor for HTMLUnknownElement doesn't work?

I didn't know that we had such a design goal.  In general, backwards and forwards compatibilities are much more important than design purity.

- R. Niwa
Received on Tuesday, 13 January 2015 19:00:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 20 October 2015 10:46:23 UTC