On Jan 26, 2008 5:56 PM, dynamo517 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> If the proposed functionality of the update function for IMG tags
> isn't accepted and if "consistency" is what the Prototype team is
> after, then the IMG tags should not be extended to use the update
> function because it doesn't apply.  There is no use for innerHTML for
> IMG tags is there?


Yes, there is no usage for innerHTML for any of the empty elements in HTML.
Although we could prevent this method from applying to IMG, BR, META and
other elements, I think it is not needed since it will add unnecessary
complexity to our DOM extension mechanism.

IMO, Element#update should throw an error if called on elements defined as
empty in HTML. But I'm not sure if the trouble to make that happen is worth
it. The most important thing to remember is that calling the update() method
on IMG element means that something is wrong with *user* code, not the
library.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to