Re: XML generator

["Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>]

A "patch" in this case would pretty much amount to a rewrite. Its based on a
discriminated record. How could you realize an OO implementation based on a
"Node" class with descendents for all the different XML elements without
pretty much annihilating everything that is already there? Check out the
description of DOM level 1 here:
http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-DOM-Level-1-19981001/level-one-core.html#ID-BB
ACDC08 and you'll notice that the XMLAda implementation - while it may
satisfy the requirements - doesn't exactly follow in the spirit of
everything inheriting from a Node class. I'm not criticizing - just
observing that a more OO design could have been done that would line up
better with the spec. Changing something this fundamental would likely
butcher it.

Even if you could somehow re-map the whole thing into tagged records with
inherited operations, you'd be dramatically changing the interface which
would kill anything currently using it. You could certainly salvage large
chunks of code but I'd think it would be better to develop one from bottom
dead center than to try to hammer XMLAda into a whole different mold.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Pascal Obry" <p.obry@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
news:usn4l4kdm.fsf@wanadoo.fr...
>
> Not a problem, just propose a patch to have XMLAda more OO... No kidding,
> XMLAda is ours, it is up to us to make it better...
>