> Truthfully there is only one semantic: The key looked up should return the > expected component. The differences in the containers is how to map that > key to the component. With the meta-data, this is one way to close that > gap.
Should be. But some containers add "special" semantics to certain key names (eg. selectors). This expectation should be removed. > As long as you keep your axioms simple and few, then the rest will feel natural. > You shouldn't have to have to read 50 pages before you can develop something > that can work. It should be natural, and anything outside of that would feel > unnatural so you would expect it to not be allowed. > > Simple elegance does not mean weak contracts, it means sensible ones. Agreed. I don't want to have to read anything :) However, confusion should be cleared up (when necessary) by using more descriptive language in the API docs. API docs are the only "design" documents I ever want to have to look at. Honestly, to go beyond that IMHO is just the trademark of some pretentious, XP-hating software engineer. :) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
