W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2015

Re: Defining a constructor for Element and friends

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 05:48:15 +0100
To: Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me>
Cc: WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
Message-ID: <bgsbbah58smeckn9gm6f0dpul95kcpho0r@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
* Domenic Denicola wrote:
>From: Bjoern Hoehrmann [mailto:derhoermi@gmx.net] 
>> I know that this a major concern to you, but my impression is that few 
>> if any other people regard that as anything more than "nice to have", 
>> especially if you equate "explaining" with having a public API for it.
>
>How do you propose having a private constructor API?
>
>How do you propose instances of the objects even existing at all, if
>there is no constructor that creates them?
>
>This is one of those "only makes sense to a C++ programmer" things.

I think it is misleading to describe something as "a design goal" if it
is not widely accepted as a design goal, and my impression is that this
is not widely accepted as a design goal. I also think it is entirely
normal to deal with objects you have no way of creating on your own.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
D-10243 Berlin · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
 Available for hire in Berlin (early 2015)  · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Wednesday, 14 January 2015 04:48:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:27:25 UTC