W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > July to September 1998

Re: NO_CHILDREN_ALLOWED_ERR exception

From: Tom Otvos <tomo@everyware.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 17:03:46 -0400
Message-ID: <01e301bdc7c7$06e1e9d0$160410ac@nebula.everyware.com>
To: "Don Park" <donpark@quake.net>, <www-dom@w3.org>
Don,

I would have thought that NO_CHILDREN_ALLOWED_ERR (or HIERARCHY_REQUEST_ERR)
is more precise that the presumably alternate NOT_CHILD_ERR and may be more
useful in some cases.  As an aside, if one were building an editor, it may
also be useful to have an accessor that determines whether or not children
are allowed, so that the UI can adjust itself according to a node's "child
bearing" capabilities.

Just a thought...

Tom Otvos
Director of Research, EveryWare Development Inc.
http://www.everyware.com/
"Try not! Do, or do not. There is no 'try'." - Yoda

-----Original Message-----
From: Don Park <donpark@quake.net>
To: www-dom@w3.org <www-dom@w3.org>
Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 5:22 PM
Subject: Re: NO_CHILDREN_ALLOWED_ERR exception


>Tom,
>
>I can see that replaceChild and appendChild needs to throw
>NO_CHILDREN_ALLOWED_ERR but I don't see why removeChild needs to throw it?
>
>BTW, the latest spec (not public yet) documents insertBefore, appendChild,
>and replaceChild as throwing HIERARCHY_REQUEST_ERR instead of
>NO_CHILDREN_ALLOWED_ERR.
>
>Don
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 14 August 1998 17:06:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:13:45 GMT