- From: Jonas Sicking <sicking@bigfoot.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:03:18 +0100
- To: <www-dom@w3.org>
- Cc: "Ray Whitmer" <rayw@netscape.com>
Ray Whitmer wrote: > Stefan Wachter wrote: > > 2. replaceWholeText method > > > > This method has a lot of tree-processing logic that should not be > > executed by a child node on its parent node. I would prefer the parent > > node to have control over the process. Therefore I propose a method on > > the node interface: > > > > /** > > * Replaces the logically-adjactent text nodes always by a NEW text node. > > */ > > public Text replaceWholeText(int anIndex); // alternatively: > > replaceWholeText(Text aTextNode); > > See the above objections to using an index and the more-complex signature. I have to ask what is the intended use for replaceWholeText? I can defenetly see the use getting WholeText since it fits better with XPath. But chainging it feels very awkward since it could morph big parts of tree. I think a better way of editing a tree using an "XPath/infoset model" would be to have users normalize the tree first and then use the normal interfaces. / Jonas Sicking
Received on Thursday, 14 March 2002 07:58:30 UTC