Behavior of matches() and closest() with :scope()
David Håsäther <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.dom.general,gmane.comp.web.css.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAMPaTMdTkie9aDKBHw9o6foxb-vzXfTATMxe_QqTsv8KFQdi7g@mail.gmail.com> |
On Saturday, September 13, 2014, Garrett Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I guess the way to fix this for matches() would be to add a :scope > > elements argument. What about closest(), should it have that argument > > too? > > > > Closest what -- ancestor? parent? sibling? Closest inclusive ancestor: http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-tree-inclusive-ancestor > I've never been a fan of jQuery, but the method names there are actually > quite a bit less bad. jQuery's closest() was the inspiration for the name. Anne, passing the element that closest() was called on makes the most sense to me too. -- David Håsäther