alfonsoml wrote: > You can try to use it that way if you like, but > ​...​ >
​No, I don't want to do that. I have a different concern, almost the opposite of what you said. I want to use the normal JS approach to "getting" an element. But if my JavaScript is complicated... how can I be sure it's my JS code that's getting the element, rather than this old, unreliable DOM-legacy stuff? I doubt if there's any way I can disable that legacy stuff so I can be sure that my normal JS is actually what's getting the element. <http://Sanstudio.com> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/firebug. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/firebug/CAMoMLKir5-_kp00%2BBVRqO5AvMgrkXXRa-ZVuQuDVpOByPyqJmg%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
