On 11/24/11 7:07 PM, Sean Hogan wrote:
If and when there is a need for a matching method that does imply :scope (which I provided a use-case for in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/0342.html)
That's a use case passing in an explicit reference node. If you're doing that, then it seems like using an explicit :scope in the selector would be just fine. But I'll accept that in some sort of edge cases you can't do that.
then it could be called matches().
That seems backwards: "does this node match this selector?" is the common use case, so should have the shorter name, no?
-Boris
