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]

Reply via email to