W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > January to March 2000

Re: Comments on DOM2 CR

From: David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 08:38:24 -0800
Message-ID: <38C3DF00.2C9D7786@pacbell.net>
To: keshlam@us.ibm.com
Cc: jvogel@ebt.com, kboone@ebt.com, www-dom@w3.org
keshlam@us.ibm.com wrote:
> > You might want to re-think this.  AT present, both Document
> > and DOMImplementation serve as factories for various things.
> > You are saying that you would use Document to
> > create TreeWalkers and NodeIterators, but as currently specified you use
> > DOMImplementation to create DocumentType and Document objects,
> > a bit inconsistent.
> No, that's actually pretty consistant.

Except for DocumentType objects.

Something has to be a factory-for-the-factory, so having a special case
to bootsrap a Document doesn't seem odd to me.

>	 Since a Document's context is mostly defined by the
> DOMImplementation, we put the factory there. We could have put it on
> DocumentType, but DocumentType is optional.

And anyway, DocumentType as factory for Document would be wrong
since the contained object can't create its container.

- Dave
Received on Monday, 6 March 2000 11:38:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:36:45 UTC