On Mar 16, 2012, at 1:40 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 01:59:48 +0100, Vincent Hardy vha...@adobe.commailto:vha...@adobe.com wrote: b. Use sequenceT everywhere except where T=Node, in which case we would use NodeList. This is consistent with DOM4 and inconsistent within the
The main reason to keep NodeList is because we'd like to add other APIs to NodeList in the future that operate on the Nodes in the list (e.g. remove). I don't really see use-cases for wanting a similar thing with the other cases here, so I think sticking with arrays of Ranges and Regions is fine.
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 5:32 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote: On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:03:23 +0100, Cameron McCormack c...@mcc.id.au wrote: Anne van Kesteren: Wasn't there a compatibility constrain with doing that? I don't remember -- the only difference it would make is that
Anne van Kesteren: Okay, annotated NodeList with [ArrayClass]. What about HTMLCollection? Should I add it there too? Could you take a look at NodeList and HTMLCollection for accuracy? It is probably not feasible to add to HTMLCollection, because it has a named property getter which is not
Cameron McCormack: It is probably not feasible to add to HTMLCollection, because it has a named property getter which is not [OverrideBuiltins]. That means that all the new properties on the prototype like concat, push, etc. would begin to shadow any named elements on the collection. On the