On 11-08-11 6:07 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Ryosuke Niwa<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Ehsan Akhgari<[email protected]> wrote:
I think the confusion is arising because you chose to attach undoManager
to elements, not nodes. Note that document _is_ a node in the DOM, but it's
not an element. I think we should just modify the spec to attach
undoManager to nodes. Once we have that, we don't need to treat
documentElement specially at all, it just looks at its parent (the document
node) and gets the undoManager from there.
Makes sense.
The only downside is that we should explicitly prohibit some node types
from having an undoManager where it doesn't make sense (such as text nodes,
comment nodes, etc.). We can enumerate them explicitly and say that
accessing the undoManager on these types of nodes will throw.
Alternatively, can we say that only Element and Document are allowed to have
it?
Yup, that's what I think we should do. Though it'll sort of fall out
naturally since UndoManagers are by default only available on
Documents, and the only way you can enable it on other Nodes is
through attributes, which only exist on Elements.
Yes, that sounds good to me too.
Ehsan
