before/after/replaceWith behave the same in this case is just a side effect of DOM trying to be less surprising and more symmetrical for the curious ones. I doubt most people would even aware they behave the same in this case. Whenever the user cases come, I believe most people will just use replaceWith.
> On Jan 27, 2015, at 8:51 PM, Anne van Kesteren <ann...@annevk.nl> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Jonas Sicking <jo...@sicking.cc> wrote: >> In general I agree that it feels unintuitive that you can't replace a node >> with a collection which includes the node itself. So the extra line or two >> of code seems worth it. > > You don't think it's weird that before/after/replaceWith all end up > doing the same for that scenario? Perhaps it's okay... > > > -- > https://annevankesteren.nl/
