- From: Jeff Mackay <jmackay@yahoo.com>
- Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 14:30:11 -0400 (EDT)
- 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 UTC