On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Khaled Noaman wrote: > If I understand correctly, the new proposal has nothing to do with the > underlying DOM implementation. The proposal is to add two new > non-standard extensions to DOMNode. My concern is that we are > mixing implementation issues with standard spec compliance. The > DOMNode and its underlying DOM tree represent an interface for > the DOM spec, and the details for the implementation is left to the > users. I agree that adding those two new methods won't affect > performance, but I think that we should not add any implementation > specific methods to the DOM interface. > > Just my 2 cents worth...
I normally am against adding any non standard methods into the DOM interfaces. The one area where I am not immediately against this is memory management. We already have a non standard release call to deal with the current model. If we want flexibility for users of xerces-c then it does not seem unreasonable to add additional methods. As these are non standard I would have no problem with them being in ifdefs and requiring a special build. I know this is a frequently requested feature and considering it is low impact I don't have an objection to giving it a try. as with Khaled - just my 2 pence :) Gareth -- Gareth Reakes, Head of Product Development +44-1865-203192 DecisionSoft Limited http://www.decisionsoft.com XML Development and Services --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]