Re: DocumentLS.saveXML (Repost)

Thanks for the response,

As far as I can remember this is meant to be deep all the time.
Let me check it with the next telco of the editorial team to see whether
we need to change the description of saveXML.I don't see any use case for a non-deep serialization of a node.

The dom wg responses to postings to www-dom either explicit or implicit,
that's where the public mailing list is meant for. It make take a while
before issues are discussed.

Jeroen

=====
X-Hive Corporation
Jeroen van Rotterdam, CEO
e-mail: jeroen@x-hive.com
phone: +31 10 7108600
http://www.x-hive.com





> I'm posting this again, because our IT guys said there may have been
> problems with our Exchange server, and it may have not gone out.
>
> I'd really like to get some feedcback from someone on the list
> regarding this.
>
> I'm back on Level 3 Load/Save for DOM-Lingo, and I have a quick
> question (based on the 09 Apr 2002 Draft):
>
> DocumentLS.saveXML isn't clear enough as to whether it's deep or not.
> If the snode parameter is null, the whole document is serialized. OK,
> that's deep. But if it is non-null, then ONLY the Node provided is
> serialized? What if one wishes to use DocumentLS.saveXML to serialize a
> specific node AND its children? I think it might be nice to have a
> boolean deep argument for this method, and specify that the provided
> Node, and all its children, may be serialized if the deep parameter is
> true. If false, then only the provided Node is serialized.
>
> And also, regarding the utility of the WWW-DOM list: how are posts such
> as these handled by the WG? Are they entered as Issues to be resolved
> as part of the current Draft cycle? Or are they simply reviewed and
> resonded to in real time, if a response is deemed appropriate?
>
> ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
> Christopher Watson
> Sr. Software Engineer
> Interactive Web Media
> Lightspan, Inc.
> Tel 858.824.8457
> Fax 858.824.8001
> ___________________________

Received on Tuesday, 28 May 2002 17:02:47 UTC