Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
b. you add Node item(in unsigned long index); but that is not really consistent with the existing way of querying list of nodes. My very strong preference goes to solution a.At the least you would need a different name as this would go on all
Oh sure. Sorry for that, my 7am conf call disturbed me a bit :-) Anyway, that's not my preferred solution here.
element nodes and you would probably run into name clashes quickly, and confuse authors (NodeList.item vs. Element.item for example). However, you could also just use XPath, or Selectors, or one of the many other methods for this particular case, I don't think this addition is needed.
I do think this is needed. Having a complex and powerful method to do something is never an excuse for not having a simple and dedicated way to do the same thing. Please see that from a web author's perspective. I must add that from an implementor's perspective, dealing with firstElementChild is FAR easier than dealing with the results of an XPath query... </Daniel>
