- From: <keshlam@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 15:18:43 -0500
- To: www-dom@w3.org
>Thank you for posting the revision of the paragraph. Nevertheless the >solution it suggests does not satisfy me. <...> If >whatToShow exists in TreeWalkers for the reason of performance, >it would be best, if it supports rejecting a whole branch of the tree. Unfortunately that would defeat the use cases that whatToShow was designed to handle, such as "hide the EntityReference nodes". Unless we make the skip-versus-reject behavior of whatToShow user-selectable, or provide a second field for whatToReject... but that feels like scope creep to me. You can write the desired filtering behavior today. The question is whether the current behavior is excessively confusing even when documented. >And finally, a suggestion for an additional attribute for the >NodeIterator and TreeWalker interface: > filtered of type boolean How would this differ from, eg, (NodeIterator.getFilter()!=null)? ______________________________________ Joe Kesselman / IBM Research
Received on Saturday, 26 February 2000 15:16:09 UTC