- From: Nagy, Marton <MARTON.NAGY@saic.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 16:00:21 -0500
- To: jeni@jenitennison.com
- Cc: www-xml-query-comments@w3.org, jmarsh@microsoft.com
Hi Jeni, Your remark about the naming of the attribute node constructors is valid. We will consider alternate names for these constructors. Best regards, Marton Nagy > Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 14:21:30 +0000 > From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> > Message-ID: <48539039577.20020113142130@jenitennison.com> > To: www-xml-query-comments@w3.org > Subject: Data Model WD - attribute node constructors > > Hi, > > I think it's confusing to call the attribute node constructors > attribute-complex-node and attribute-simple-node. This naming scheme > is the same as that used for the element constructors, but there it > makes sense because the type of an element may be either complex or > simple. Attributes, on the other hand, can only have a simple type. I > think that either a unified constructor or two constructors named > attribute-list-node and attribute-atom-node would be more appropriate. > > Cheers, > > Jeni > --- > Jeni Tennison > http://www.jenitennison.com/ >
Received on Tuesday, 22 January 2002 16:00:57 UTC