On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Anne van Kesteren <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 18:28:14 +0200, Jonas Sicking <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Indeed, Node.attributes is currently the only way to enumerate all the >> attributes of an Element. This makes me think there are probably >> people out there doing this, and so I suspect Node.attributes is >> needed for web compat. Additionally, it seems bad to remove the >> ability to enumerate attributes completely. Lastly, keeping Attrs as a >> type of object gives us something to return from DOM-XPath. >> >> What I suggest is #2 in Anne's list. Make Attrs into objects with the >> following properties: >> >> * name >> * value >> * namespaceURI >> * localName >> >> 'name' would be my guess for most commonly used when iterating all the >> atttributes. The others are the minimum set of attributes needed for >> proper enumeration >> >> We might also consider these attributes, though if they're not needed >> for web compat, then it would be nice to not add them IMHO. >> >> * ownerElement >> * prefix >> * nodeName >> * nodeValue >> >> Also, I wouldn't mind making value/nodeValue readonly, but I don't >> feel strongly about that. > > This in addition to #1 then, I assume? (Not having child nodes for Attr > would such a win already.)
Yes, most definitely. The list of attributes above would be *all* the attributes on Attr objects, and .childNodes isn't in there. / Jonas
