W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > October to December 1999

Re: DOM L2 comments, various

From: Jeff Mackay <jmackay@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 14:30:11 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <19991004183352.7096.rocketmail@web1105.mail.yahoo.com>
To: www-dom@w3.org

--- keshlam@us.ibm.com wrote:
> >Those of us who need to represent DTD's _must_
> define new node types.
> 
> There are other solutions. Produce a custom
> representation for the DTD...

This is possible.  Probably a better solution.  But
not always the most convenient. And if the DOM is
unable to prevent users from extending NodeType, it
should present rules for extending it that will
minimize compatibility problems in the future.  

Many argued in vain against the use of NodeType to
begin with. The argument was that it was redundant,
since each node type was represented by a unique
interface. 

Ok, so it made it into the spec, and people are using
it. Great.  Now add a sentence or two to the spec that
tells the developer that if they extend NodeType
(which isn't recommended), they should use values in
the range (x..y) which will never be used by W3C for
future values of NodeType. Likewise for exception
codes. 

------------
Jeff Mackay
Vtopia, Inc.


=====

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
Received on Monday, 4 October 1999 15:46:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:13:46 GMT