On Thu, 5 Jul 2007, Kore Nordmann wrote: > On Thu, 2007-07-05 at 15:06 +0200, Derick Rethans wrote: > > We also discussed the name, and we think that Tree is more > > welcome. With our discussions in mind, I took the liberty of creating a > > new requirements document out of the original one by Thomas. You can > > read it below. Comments are appreciated: > [...] > > Design goals > > ============ > > > > It's desirable to have an OO API to handle the nodes like the DOM > > extension, e.g. Node->appendChild(). On the other hand it's an advantage > > not be obliged to extend an abstract node class when working with the > > content of the leaves. > > Even DOM works quite well, I still don't like it's interfaces. What > about implementing RecursiveIterator to access the (sub) trees with a > RecursiveIteratorIterator?
I wasn't suggesting to use the DOM interfaces - they are too XML specific. > For adding nodes you still would need those methods, as we see in > SimpleXML, solving this with magic properties does not really work well > in all cases. > > Maybe this just belong into the design specs... :) Yes :-) regards, Derick -- Components mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ez.no/mailman/listinfo/components
