Hello,
here are some arguments according to E4X specification:
"E4X applications are smaller and more intuitive to ECMAScript developers
than comparable XSLT or DOM
applications. They are easier to read, write and maintain requiring less
developer time, skill and specialized
knowledge. The net result is reduced code complexity, tighter revision
cycles and shorter time to market for
Internet applications."
Best regards,
Afonso
On 4/4/07, Adam Roben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Apr 4, 2007, at 12:25 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> On Apr 4, 2007, at 6:54 AM, Rodrigo Melo wrote:
>
>> Hi, I'm interested work on it too. I've started reading something
>> about E4X and WebKit, and specially looking at JavaScriptCore
>> code. My first question was where I would start to code.
>
> Although we've discussed E4X support, we're not entirely sure we
> want it. It's a big chunk of extra functionality that isn't really
> used on the web. And the web already provides the DOM for XML
> processing. So we'd want to hear some some good reasons before
> adding support.
One argument in favor of it is for use outside of the web, where
you don't necessarily have a DOM available.
-Adam
_______________________________________________
webkit-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
_______________________________________________
webkit-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
