Exacly my point. This shouldn't be seen as a replacement for a more
robust solution like the one earlier in this thread or the existing
Builder but more of a document.createElement-wrapper.

I'll submit a patch asap!


On 2/6/07, 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 prototype-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to