- From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 14:07:51 +0200
- To: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Cc: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, www-dom@w3.org
On Jun 08, 2007, at 15:35, Norman Walsh wrote:
> / Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> was heard to say:
> | No, the Java bindings are automatically generated from the
> specification
> | source code, which only documents attributes as attributes, not
> as indi-
> | vidual methods. For attributes that are read/write you inevitably
> get in
> | some cases odd documentation. I don't think it is feasible to
> write two
> | versions of the text for all such attributes, and I don't see an
> easy
> | way to automatically generate more suitable text.
>
> That's unfortunate. I wonder if it would be possible to add an
> explanation of the problem to the description of the class at the top
> of the file? At least that way readers would know it was intentional
> and not a documentation bug.
Java still doesn't support accessors? I'd file that as a bug against
Java 1/2:-)
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It can hardly be a coincidence that no language on Earth has ever
produced the phrase, 'as pretty as an airport.' Airports are ugly.
Some are very ugly. Some attain a degree of ugliness that can only
be the result of a special effort."
-- Douglas Adams
Received on Monday, 11 June 2007 15:07:19 UTC