Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2006 06:29:54 +0200, liorean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* Several people have raised issues with naming the methods match and
matchAll as those might suggest a boolean return value. Alternate
suggestions
have been select and selectAll.
For ECMAScript, I think "match" is a fine choice of verb and is
consistent. For the closest comparison, regex 'match' isn't boolean.
Sure, I like match() as well. Mostly because it's short and simple, but
there were some concerns raised.
I like match() too because it's much shorter than
getElementsBySelector(), but I think the fact that it only returns a
single node is confusing and that, in most cases, authors would want the
whole collection, not just the first match. I think it would be better
if the methods were:
interface DocumentSelector {
StaticNodeList match(in DOMString selectors, in XPathNSResolver
nsresolver);
Node matchOne(in DOMString selectors, in XPathNSResolver nsresolver);
};
Or possibly matchFirst() instead.
<doc>
/.../
<elm1>
<elm2 xml:id="bleh">
<elm3/>
<elm3/>
<elm2>
</elm1>
/.../
</doc>
var
selectorMatches=document.getElementById('bleh').matchAll(':root
elm3',resolver);
What's wrong with using:
var selectorMatches = document.matchAll('#bleh elm3', resolver);
There may still be use cases for matching a sub tree, so it may be worth
extending the Element interface too, but all the ones I can think of can
be handled by simply writing a more specific selector.
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
