Use toWebTextAreaElement in GetTextWebTextAreaElement

Use toWebTextAreaElement in GetTextWebTextAreaElement

Elements may have the tag name "textarea" but could not be html textarea element.

BUG=358235

[keishi, 2014-05-19 05:25:56]

Blink side: https://codereview.chromium.org/287313003/

[Ilya Sherman, 2014-05-19 08:41:21]

LGTM, thanks!

There are other instances of hasTagName in the Autofill code: [
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#search/&q=hastagname%20file:aut...
].  Should all of these be updated as well?  Should hasTagName() be removed from
the Web* API layer entirely?

https://codereview.chromium.org/295603002/diff/20001/components/autofill/cont...
File components/autofill/content/renderer/page_click_tracker.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/295603002/diff/20001/components/autofill/cont...
components/autofill/content/renderer/page_click_tracker.cc:51: const
WebTextAreaElement GetTextWebTextAreaElement(const WebNode& node) {
nit: While you're here, would you mind updating the function name to drop the
redundant "Text", i.e. "GetWebTextAreaElement()"?

[tkent, 2014-05-19 08:47:00]

On 2014/05/19 08:41:21, Ilya Sherman wrote:
> There are other instances of hasTagName in the Autofill code: [
>
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#search/&q=hastagname%20file:aut...
> ].  Should all of these be updated as well?  Should hasTagName() be removed
from
> the Web* API layer entirely?

Yes and yes.
We have WebElement::hasHTMLTagName instead.

[Ilya Sherman, 2014-05-19 09:19:45]

On 2014/05/19 08:47:00, tkent wrote:
> On 2014/05/19 08:41:21, Ilya Sherman wrote:
> > There are other instances of hasTagName in the Autofill code: [
> >
>
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#search/&q=hastagname%20file:aut...
> > ].  Should all of these be updated as well?  Should hasTagName() be removed
> from
> > the Web* API layer entirely?
> 
> Yes and yes.
> We have WebElement::hasHTMLTagName instead.

Aha.  Hmm, does it make sense to use hasHTMLTagName for this CL rather than
introducing a new toWebTextArea() method?

I've filed a bug for moving the rest of the Autofill code to use the correct
method: [ https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=374725 ].  I've
tentatively assigned it to myself, but am not sure how soon I'll be able to work
on it.  Feel free to snag it if you'd like to! :)

[tkent, 2014-05-19 10:06:24]

On 2014/05/19 09:19:45, Ilya Sherman wrote:
> > We have WebElement::hasHTMLTagName instead.
> 
> Aha.  Hmm, does it make sense to use hasHTMLTagName for this CL rather than
> introducing a new toWebTextArea() method?

Yeah, it would be a simpler solution, and easy to merge the change to a branch.

> I've filed a bug for moving the rest of the Autofill code to use the correct
> method: [ https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=374725 ].  I've
> tentatively assigned it to myself, but am not sure how soon I'll be able to
work
> on it.  Feel free to snag it if you'd like to! :)

Thanks!

[keishi, 2014-05-20 14:56:14]

On 2014/05/19 09:19:45, Ilya Sherman wrote:
> On 2014/05/19 08:47:00, tkent wrote:
> > On 2014/05/19 08:41:21, Ilya Sherman wrote:
> > > There are other instances of hasTagName in the Autofill code: [
> > >
> >
>
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#search/&q=hastagname%20file:aut...
> > > ].  Should all of these be updated as well?  Should hasTagName() be
removed
> > from
> > > the Web* API layer entirely?
> > 
> > Yes and yes.
> > We have WebElement::hasHTMLTagName instead.
> 
> Aha.  Hmm, does it make sense to use hasHTMLTagName for this CL rather than
> introducing a new toWebTextArea() method?
> 
> I've filed a bug for moving the rest of the Autofill code to use the correct
> method: [ https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=374725 ].  I've
> tentatively assigned it to myself, but am not sure how soon I'll be able to
work
> on it.  Feel free to snag it if you'd like to! :)

We decided not to add toWebTextAreaElement so I've created another CL.
https://codereview.chromium.org/293993004/