atom feed72 messages in org.w3.public-webapiRe: ACTION-87: Selectors API
FromSent OnAttachments
13 earlier messages
Cameron McCormackFeb 26, 2006 1:04 pm 
Maciej StachowiakFeb 26, 2006 3:03 pm 
Jonas SickingFeb 28, 2006 1:57 pm 
Ian HicksonMar 6, 2006 12:33 pm 
Ian HicksonMar 6, 2006 12:35 pm 
Anne van KesterenMar 22, 2006 2:30 am 
Anne van KesterenMar 22, 2006 2:33 am 
Anne van KesterenMar 22, 2006 2:35 am 
mozerMar 22, 2006 3:16 am 
Anne van KesterenMar 22, 2006 3:58 am 
mozerMar 22, 2006 4:30 am 
Anne van KesterenMar 22, 2006 4:37 am 
Jim LeyMar 22, 2006 5:43 am 
Anne van KesterenMar 22, 2006 6:08 am 
Jim LeyMar 22, 2006 6:45 am 
Maciej StachowiakMar 22, 2006 11:16 am 
Maciej StachowiakMar 22, 2006 11:22 am 
Maciej StachowiakMar 22, 2006 11:25 am 
Robin BerjonMar 22, 2006 2:01 pm 
Maciej StachowiakMar 22, 2006 2:28 pm 
Ian HicksonMar 22, 2006 2:48 pm 
Ian HicksonMar 22, 2006 2:51 pm 
Maciej StachowiakMar 22, 2006 3:20 pm 
Jim LeyMar 22, 2006 6:17 pm 
Jim LeyMar 22, 2006 6:24 pm 
Anne van KesterenMar 23, 2006 4:28 am 
Ian HicksonMar 23, 2006 2:31 pm 
Anne van KesterenMar 25, 2006 4:36 am 
Ian HicksonMar 27, 2006 3:13 pm 
Anne van KesterenApr 3, 2006 5:46 am 
Anne van KesterenApr 3, 2006 5:51 am 
lioreanMay 12, 2006 8:49 pm 
Anne van KesterenMay 13, 2006 4:15 am 
lioreanMay 13, 2006 12:08 pm 
Anne van KesterenMay 13, 2006 12:26 pm 
lioreanMay 13, 2006 2:40 pm 
Anne van KesterenMay 14, 2006 7:20 am 
lioreanMay 14, 2006 4:22 pm 
Anne van KesterenMay 15, 2006 3:15 am 
lioreanMay 16, 2006 9:29 pm 
Anne van KesterenMay 17, 2006 5:18 am 
Lachlan HuntMay 17, 2006 6:19 am 
Anne van KesterenMay 17, 2006 6:30 am 
Jim LeyMay 17, 2006 6:35 am 
Lachlan HuntMay 17, 2006 7:02 am 
Robin BerjonMay 17, 2006 7:07 am 
Anne van KesterenMay 18, 2006 12:46 am 
Jonas SickingMay 30, 2006 3:11 pm 
Jonas SickingMay 30, 2006 3:24 pm 
Jonas SickingMay 30, 2006 3:42 pm 
9 later messages
Subject:Re: ACTION-87: Selectors API
From:Jim Ley (ji@jibbering.com)
Date:Mar 22, 2006 6:24:33 pm
List:org.w3.public-webapi

"Maciej Stachowiak" <mj@apple.com>

On Mar 22, 2006, at 6:45 AM, Jim Ley wrote:

"Anne van Kesteren" <ann@opera.com>

Fair enough, here are the requirements for the name:

* short * simple

Why are these requirements for the name, no other DOM names are short and simple, they're clear and unambiguous,

And that's why so much code is done with DOM Level 0 instead,

No, almost everything is done with the lowest possible DOM level that meets the use case, and it will continue to do so, anything else is crazyness, not least because the only versioning capability the W3 has given scripters is the ludicrous hasFeature.

It's also the correct behaviour, stick with the oldest and most reliable.

it's important for common operations to have simple names.

I think that's rubbish, I see scripters having no problems with the length of names, they're mostly confused about the what methods actually do - I think you're reading too much into the minority library blogging scripts, and spending little time with large scale scripting projects in commercial environments.

It seems preferrable to have the single-item version be a shorter expression than the multi-match. I do think the 1 case is significantly different from the N case, because in the single-item case you won't loop, you will just want to do your processing directly.

That's an optimisation for the User Agent to make, not the scripter, the limit 1 will specifically allow the script author not to loop, just like using match.

Furthermore, the name "selectNodes" for a function that matches against an XPath expression seems accepted, even though it says nothing about XPath in the name.

Accepted where? It's certainly not accepted by me, however the existing implementation carries weight - which is why I'd be somewhat willing to accept the getElementsBySelector as at least there is one implementation.

Cheers,

Jim.