[XML-SIG] Ugh! Why are DOM access methods spelled with a leading
Tue, 27 Jun 2000 16:40:52 -0600
> Uche Ogbuji wrote:
> Thanks. How would anyone know about this without living in the SIG or
> searching the archives? Obviously they wouldn't.
Agreed that this is not the best. I've been tooling around with a basic
document to help rectify. Don't worry, I haven't addressed the current
controversial point yet.
> Even after reading these, I don't see a very strong
> consensus. The strongest indication of consensus is in the
> second link you provided, which points to an
> "unofficial Python binding".
Yes, I considered it unofficial (and still do) because it is not formally
stated and published. However, I do think it represented the consensus (I
hope I've never tried to pass off "consensus" and "official" as the same
Paul's point about implementor consensus comes from the fact that both the
4DOM and PyDOM teams pledged, and soon afterwards effected a change to support
the dual foo/_get_foo convention. Note that there were no howls of protest.
You can see in the threads that pretty much everyone ended up liking the
attribute approach because of its pythonicity, whough there were a few
mentions of the implementation difficulties you've brought up.
Uche Ogbuji Principal Consultant
email@example.com +01 303 583 9900 x 101
Fourthought, Inc. http://Fourthought.com
4735 East Walnut St, Ste. C, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA
Software-engineering, knowledge-management, XML, CORBA, Linux, Python