Ian Hickson wrote:
Chaals, please see the end of this message.
On Wed, 28 May 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
It seems to me that everyone agrees that insertNode() was always
intended to insert a node _into_ the range, and that the collapsed
case was simply lost between the cracks when the DOM WG
Chaals, please see the end of this message.
On Wed, 28 May 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> >
> > It seems to me that everyone agrees that insertNode() was always
> > intended to insert a node _into_ the range, and that the collapsed
> > case was simply lost between the cracks when the DOM WG was
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 23 May 2008, Olli Pettay wrote:
So I'm not sure the errata for this issue is actually needed.
It seems to me that everyone agrees that insertNode() was always intended
to insert a node _into_ the range, and that the collapsed case was simply
lost between the cracks
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 23 May 2008, Olli Pettay wrote:
So I'm not sure the errata for this issue is actually needed.
It seems to me that everyone agrees that insertNode() was always intended
to insert a node _into_ the range, and that the collapsed case was simply
lost between the crack
Since the idea of making it clear that insertNode() inserts the node
inside the range even if the range is collapsed seems to have received a
somewhat positive response, I'd like to propose the following actual
errata text:
| DOM Level 2 Traversal and Range
|
| range-2. 2008-06-... [clarific
Olli Pettay wrote:
Olli Pettay wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
The test verifies that when you call insertNode() on a range, the node
that is passed is inserted into the range, as is required by DOM2 range
section 2.9. Inserting Content, sentences 1 and 2 (before and after the
code snippet).
The
Olli Pettay wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
The test verifies that when you call insertNode() on a range, the node
that is passed is inserted into the range, as is required by DOM2 range
section 2.9. Inserting Content, sentences 1 and 2 (before and after the
code snippet).
The 2nd sentence doesn't
Ian Hickson wrote:
The test verifies that when you call insertNode() on a range, the node
that is passed is inserted into the range, as is required by DOM2 range
section 2.9. Inserting Content, sentences 1 and 2 (before and after the
code snippet).
The 2nd sentence doesn't require adding nod
Ian Hickson wrote:
DOM2 Range doesn't define anything to this level of detail yet,
unfortunately.
Indeed. The wonders of Conway's Law...
Nevertheless, this question is somewhat important in terms of deciding where the
range should be positioned.
For example regular old insertions and dele
On Wed, 14 May 2008, Robert Sayre wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 9:02 PM, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > As I said in the very first e-mail on this subject, that's what I'd
> > like to do. However, that's a significantly higher cost (years vs
> > weeks) than releasing an errata
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 9:02 PM, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> As I said in the very first e-mail on this subject, that's what I'd like
> to do. However, that's a significantly higher cost (years vs weeks) than
> releasing an errata, and it was my impression that the Mozilla community
On Wed, 14 May 2008, Robert Sayre wrote:
> >
> > Sure. Like I said, the spec right now contradicts itself. If it didn't
> > there wouldn't be much reason to ask for errata. :-)
>
> Why not fix it and supercede it?
As I said in the very first e-mail on this subject, that's what I'd like
to do.
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 8:37 PM, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008, Robert Sayre wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure why you're sending private email about this. I asked a
>> simple question on the public list.
>
> I replied privately to the first question because it seemed rude t
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 6:15 PM, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> To my knowledge, very little Web content relies on this spec at all.
> That's why Acid3 tested it, to make it interoperable enough that it could
> be used. :-)
I thought Acid3 tested things that have been written down f
On Wed, 14 May 2008, Olli Pettay wrote:
>
> > which I believe to be the intent of the specification. This is
> > implemented by Opera and WebKit already, and is tested by Acid3.
>
> Gecko does what the current spec says.
All three implementations do what the spec says now -- the spec can be
i
Ian Hickson wrote:
I propose that we change the spec to explicitly say that if you call insertNode() on a
collapsed range, the end point offset is increased by one
Increased at what point in time, exactly? Specifically, if there is a
DOMNodeInserted listener that repositions the range when t
Ian Hickson wrote:
DOM2 Range says of the insertNode() method that "A node may be inserted
into a Range using the following method". However, if the range is
collapsed, according to a strict reading of the specification, calling
insertNode() actually inserts the node _after_ the range. I propose
DOM2 Traversal and Range has a number of problems, and really needs a
rewrite. However, in the absence of the resources to do that, I realised
that we could settle for releasing some errata. Arguably we as a working
group have somewhat the authority to do that, so here's a proposal for a
simp
18 matches
Mail list logo
