W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > October to December 2000

Re: Level 3, DocumentOrder & TreePosition enums

From: Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 16:12:30 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <14915.50110.42283.354918@cj42289-a.reston1.va.home.com>
To: rayw@netscape.com (Ray Whitmer)
Cc: www-dom@w3.org

Ray Whitmer writes:
 > "Tree order" doesn't seem to capture the meaning like "tree position" 
 > does.  The distinction in names is intentional.

  OK.  The name itself is of limited interest for me, but the current
IDL isn't usable.  If there are to be two different enumerations,
there needs to be some prefix on the names from each ("ORDER_" and
"POSITION_" come to mind, but I won't be terribly picky).

 > While ancestors and descendants have order within a document using 
 > conventions of document order (which start tag was encountered first), 
 > they have no sequential order within a tree hierarchy.  Being an 
 > ancestor or a descendant does not feel like "order" to me, but rather 
 > relative position of the nodes, which can be in one of four directions.

  I concur; there is a semantic problem with collapsing the two
types.  There could be two types if the names don't clash, or there
could be a specific set of values, as for the NodeType constants.  I'm
not tied to either approach.


  -Fred

-- 
Fred L. Drake, Jr.  <fdrake at acm.org>
PythonLabs at Digital Creations
Received on Friday, 22 December 2000 16:17:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:13:48 GMT