Can I pass a rootNode to `nanohref`?

[m90]

Can I pass a rootNode to `nanohref`?

[m90]

Hmm, maybe I am missing something here as I tried the following:

I hacked into the choo version in my node_modules adding the root node argument to the nanohref call manually, yet choo somehow still tried to handle clicks outside of the host element.

[goto-bus-stop]

choo hasn't really supported being used in like a "sub application" style but it could be really good for that, so I think any feature that will help it excel in that use case would be really welcome :)

The behaviour in your second post kinda looks like a bug in nanohref to me, this is the code that uses the rootNode value:

https://github.com/choojs/nanohref/blob/80c11c4fdb1c731aad1b94f4c93b0c386b97c69c/index.js#L21-L27

So when you click something, it walks up the tree until it finds either an <a href> or arrives at the rootNode. but if you click a link outside the rootNode, it will still happily find the <a href>.

[m90]

Assuming the bug in nanohref is fixed, it should not be too hard to get this into choo itself, but I am really unsure where the option belongs.

A few things that could be done that I'm not a real fan of any yet:

• Add a new key to the options passed to choo([opts]). I can't even come up with a name for this.
• Allow a DOM Element to be passed instead of true|false to opts.href which scopes nanohref down to children of that element.
• Add a second optional argument to app.mount that scopes the router to the given selector. I'm not sure if this actually works because of app.start.

I think option 2 would probably be the least invasive, but it's also not really what I'd call an intuitive API. Ugh.

[m90]

Is there any input on this one as well as choojs/nanohref#13 - I'd still love to implement this in one way or the other as it's a hard requirement of what I'm working on right now.

[blahah]

You can compose the dependencies quite simply to achieve this. See for example: https://github.com/graforlock/choo-detached