yes. sorry. I thought I'd better not increase the mailing list bandwidth with a lone "Thank you" in a mail. :-s I was mistaken. Thanks to everybody.
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 11:17 AM, Doug Schepers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, Slim- > > liorean wrote (on 3/7/08 10:59 AM): > > On 07/03/2008, Slim Amamou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> hi, > >> the ElementTraversal interface is bound to readonly attributes in > >> ecmascript, whereas it is bound to methods in java. > >> why? > > > > Because having things like this as as properties is normal the > > ECMAScript way, but having getter and setter functions is the normal > > Java way. > > > >> it would be more convenient if it was bound to methods in ecmascript > either. > >> i can think of two arguments for this : > >> - the bindings will be more consistent (so that you don't have > >> "getChildElementCount" and "childElementCount" representing the same > >> binding) > > > > Having getter and setter functions using method syntax is a distinctly > > foreign way of doing this in JavaScript. Plus, these properties > > analogously match the way it's done for the node traversal bindings in > > our earlier DOM versions. And thirdly, those would be two different > > bindings to the same functionality, not the same binding. > > > David's explanation is indeed correct (thanks, David). Does this > satisfy your comment? > > Regards- > -Doug Schepers > W3C Team Contact, SVG, CDF, and WebAPI > > -- Slim Amamou http://NoMemorySpace.wordpress.com
