On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 2:42 AM, Turner Hayes <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, the issue to be resolved is, "I want to get to the next <p> tag" (for > example), right? I guess I just don't really see the advantage to having a > tag take one position (as it does according to the whitepaper) as opposed to > it taking, well, more than one position, as it would if it were rendered as > a series of insert character ops. >
You want to treat start and end tags atomically. You don't want to insert characters in the middle of a tag, because that would break the XML (ie, <test> becomes <teabcst>). The approach taken here, which is to use a single character position to represent the tag, was presumably chosen to optimise the implementation of compose + transform. I mean, yes, there are other ways of solving the "tag must be atomic" problem, but the ones I can think of would severely complicate the transform algorithm with extra logic. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wave Protocol" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en.
