On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 15:30:54 +0100, Boris Zbarsky <bzbar...@mit.edu> wrote:
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapi/2007Mar/0066.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapi/2007Apr/0009.html
I read those. That was long after this was initially discussed though.
And also around the time I stopped being the active editor of the
specification.
Er, indeed. Those seem to be discussion of ElementTraversal.
Oops.
I was pretty sure I'd raised the same issue with Selectors API, but the
W3C list search is crappy enough that I can't find the posts... In
fact, the only thread on the matter I can find is the "ACTION-87:
Selectors API" thread (announcing that you plan to start working on the
spec at) at
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapi/2006Feb/0108.html>.
Was that it?
Yeah, I think
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapi/2006Feb/0129.html gives
the basic argument. Still sounds reasonable today although it may not
apply to all implementations.
In any case, the static implementation was considerably more complicated
in Gecko, I suspect performance is a wash in most cases, though it's
easy to create examples that are much faster with one or the other
approach.
I personally would have preferred a live API. Too late now though.
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
