@ksamdev - If there aren't really any benefits I think I'll stick with the shorter version. Thanks for your help.
On Aug 27, 4:00 pm, ksamdev <[email protected]> wrote: > @atwork8 > > No benefits. The result would be the same except that work is done > with DOM objects directly if you do things the way I proposed which I > find very clear and always tend to work with. It is simply conceptual > difference. Anyway, I guess at the end browser will rearrange DOM tree > and do the job in background putting all children into new DIV. > Besides, I guess, it will have to parse new HTML of document.body that > would take some time. Thus, presumably, It is faster to work with DOM > Tree. > > On Aug 27, 7:36 am, atwork8 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > @ksamdev - what are the benefits of doing it that way over what I had > > originally posted? > > > var elBody = $(document.body); > > elBody.set('html', '<div id="wrapper">' + elBody.get('html') + '</ > > div>'); > > > On Aug 27, 1:27 pm, ksamdev <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > ok. I see your point. Then do something like: > > > > var _div = new Element( 'div'); > > > var _body = $( document.body); > > > _body.getChildren().each( function( _item) { _div.grab( _item); }); > > > _body.adopt( _div); > > > > On Aug 27, 7:22 am, atwork8 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > @ksamdev - Could you please read the problem. The results are > > > > completely different. The solution I've provided generates this: > > > > > <body><div id="wrapper">body's html</div></body> > > > > > Fabio's generates: > > > > > <div id="wrapper"><body>body's html</body></div> > >
