paul at prescod.net
Mon Feb 8 20:01:00 GMT 1999
Clark Evans wrote:
> The only time you may want to take this step backwards is if you are
> providing an generic drill down tool for database navigation...
> Once you have the primary-key/oid for the object in
> question, you would most likely want to switch to a
> smarter, class specific interface.
Note that the object oriented model already provides a feature that allows
you to treat data "generically" or "specifically". Subtyping (or interface
inheritance)! So what we really need is "tree node" base class or
That's also the answer to Simon's question about what should replace the
DOM as a generalized interface for trees. All we need is a simple "tree
node" interface. The grove model supports that. In fact I would argue that
that is probably the most important thing that the grove model DOES
The DOM "node class" also supports this. If you use that class along with
NodeList and NamedNodeMap and ignore the rest of the DOM then you can get
all of the benefit that you are going to get out of the DOM API as an
abstraction. There is no need to dumb down your data to elements and
attributes. Just use nodes.
Paul Prescod - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for only himself
"Remember, Ginger Rogers did everything that Fred Astaire did,
but she did it backwards and in high heels."
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)
More information about the Xml-dev