Actually, I withdraw my objection, since someone could write an add-on script that wraps around Martin's approach.
Martin, keep in mind that Element.writeAttributes will need to make the same accommodations for IE as Element.readAttribute. Tobie and I know all too much about this, so let us know if you want help. Cheers, Andrew On Feb 6, 4:56 pm, "Mislav Marohnić" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew: that two features bring us back to Dan's or mine implementations and > take out the lightweightness of Martin's elegant solution. > > Martin: by all means, submit a patch with tests on the already existing > ticket:http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/7476#comment:1 > > Doing so will enable easy reviewing and comparing. > > -m > > On 2/6/07, Andrew Dupont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Martin, I like your implementation a lot (especially the > > Element.writeAttributes idea, which I think should be added no matter > > what) but it's missing two things I like most about Dan Webb's > > DOMBuilder: > > > * Tags as method names. Much easier to do x.DIV(foo, bar) than to do > > new Element("div", foo, bar). > > * Easy nesting (like "x.DIV( x.P ( x.SPAN() ) )"). DOMBuilder > > responds differently based on the number and types of arguments > > passed. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prototype: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
