- From: Stephen R. Savitzky <steve@crc.ricoh.com>
- Date: 09 Sep 1998 11:45:02 -0700
- To: keshlam@us.ibm.com
- Cc: www-dom@w3.org
keshlam@us.ibm.com writes: > John Cowan asks: > >Am I missing something? > > No, you've accurately described what has to be done in order to deep-clone > a Document. > "For each Node, invoke the proper createXXX factory method on the new > Document and copy all the (IDL) attributes: then insert it into place > in the new tree" There's more. The problem is that some of the Node's might be instances of some (possibly local) _subclass_ and may contain information which cannot be correctly copied by any of the public createXXX methods. > That's a significant amount of additional code which in Level 1 would exist > _only_ to support Document.cloneNode(). It could be argued that, given > Level 1's decision not to handle the more general uses of this logic, > implementing it for this one specific case is less reasonable than > declining to support cloning of Documents would be. I think it would be a tragic mistake if it was not possible to copy a document, or to copy a node from one document to another, using Level 1. That's the kind of omission that would seriously impact the credibility of the specification (not to mention its usefullness). -- Stephen R. Savitzky Chief Software Scientist, Ricoh Silicon Valley, Inc., <steve@rsv.ricoh.com> California Research Center voice: 650.496.5710 fax: 650.854.8740 URL: http://rsv.ricoh.com/~steve/ home: <steve@starport.com> URL: http://www.starport.com/people/steve/
Received on Wednesday, 9 September 1998 14:38:49 UTC