On Tue, 9 Oct 2012, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 1:29 AM, Ian Hickson <i...@hixie.ch> wrote: > > We could only change Path, since the others are already deployed. We > > could add new constructors, but that would just be new redundancy, and > > thus probably isn't worth it. > > FWIW, I think adding new constructors to make things more convenient for > authors can definitely be worth it. E.g. I'm strongly considering adding > new Document() so you no longer need > document.implementation.createDocument(..., ..., ...). Similarly we > already added new Event() and friends to substantially improve the > custom events situation.
For new features I completely agree, but for old features we have to be really careful about not adding redundancy, IMHO. Events are used quite a lot and the new constructors did much more than just make the API consistent -- it also made it way simpler, to the point where what was three lines of code with dozens of ambiguous arguments is now a single line of very readable code. With the canvas objects it's not at all clear to me that we'd get the same win. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'