On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 09:50:45 +0200, Daniel Glazman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
1. I think the title of the document is badly chosen. The spec*
does not offer any API on selectors themselves but, in substance,
offers an implementation for document.getElementsBySelector().
Since we may have in the future a real API for accessing selectors
themselves into the CSS OM, I strongly recommend a name more
related to the contents than it is today.
We've been through this several times. Some people think the name is ok,
others don't and I don't really care anymore.
Regarding the CSSOM, that will just let you access a selector as a
DOMString and if it would provide an API that would be CSSSelector or
something...
2. I think it's an error to restrict this new API to the document
level, in particular if we have scoped stylesheets in the near
future. I recommend extending the API to all nodes.
Well, the option is kept for extending it to other nodes. I'd like scoped
selectors to be defined first.
3. for scoped stylesheets, and if item 2 above is accepted, I recommend
adding a boolean parameter to both matchSingl() and matchAll()
methods saying if it's a scoped request or not. In the case of a
scoped request, the :root pseudo-class then represents the current
node on which the method is invoked.
4. I really hate having two different methods for matchSingle and
matchAll, and I'd prefer a single method with a boolean indicating
if only the first result should be retrieved or all. The result
should always be a StaticNodeList. If the boolean is true, then the
length of the result is <= 1, and it's unconstrained otherwise.
I don't think adding more arguments is acceptable.
5. Disruptive Innovations SARL becoming a W3C member on the 1st of
October, we are ready to help on this specification.
If you could provide a testsuite, that'd be cool!
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
