This document:Public document·View comments·Disposition of Comments·
Nearby:Web Applications Working Group Other specs in this tool
Quick access to LC-1985 LC-1986 LC-1987 LC-1988 LC-1989 LC-1990
Previous: LC-1989 Next: LC-1987
Some comments on http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/ElementTraversal/publish/ElementTraversal.html below * As mentioned on IRC, node types should probably be capitalized. E.g. Text instead of text. * It's not clear from the introduction why we need childElementCount. Having both linked list and array like traversing for the DOM is already slightly unclear to me, but childElementCount seems to provide neither. * I don't understand why 1.1 is marked as informative and section 1. is not. * 2. talks about implementing methods where you mean attributes. * In 2. ElementTraversal is not marked up. * I don't understand "A User Agent may implement similar interfaces in other specifications, but such implementation is not required for conformance to this specification, if the User Agent is designed for a minimal code footprint." I suggest dropping this sentence. * It's not clear to me how "For the purpose of ElementTraversal, an entity reference node which represents an element must be treated as an element node." works. Does this mean that an EntityReference node also implements this interface? I suggest dropping this sentence or stating that this interface assumes that all entities are normalized away or something. (We should really get rid of syntactic sugar in the DOM in due course...) * "Accessing this attribute of an element must return a reference to the first child node of that element which is of nodeType 1, as an Element object." I don't think ", as an Element object." makes much sense in this sentence. (Likewise for similar sentences.) * I don't think the IDL should be in the appendix. It's a useful overview of what the draft defines. I would also like to see pointers from the IDL bits to their definitions. As we've done in the XMLHttpRequest specification.