xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Scott Boag/CAM/Lotus" <Scott_B...@lotus.com>
Subject Re: parser-next-gen goals, plan, and requirements
Date Wed, 12 Jul 2000 16:42:01 GMT

> My understanding of the proposal was that there would be *no* tree model
> in the core.

Taking your's, Brett's, and James' comments together, I'm fine with this.

-scott




                                                                                         
                         
                    Jason Hunter                                                         
                         
                    <jhunter@acm.        To:     Scott Boag/CAM/Lotus <Scott_Boag@lotus.com>
                      
                    org>                 cc:     general@xml.apache.org, jason@jdom.org
                           
                                         Subject:     Re: parser-next-gen goals, plan, and
requirements            
                    07/12/2000                                                           
                         
                    01:51 AM                                                             
                         
                    Please                                                               
                         
                    respond to                                                           
                         
                    general                                                              
                         
                                                                                         
                         
                                                                                         
                         



Scott Boag/CAM/Lotus wrote:
>
> > are you subsribed? It doesn't look like it!
>
> Yes I am.  It is a very busy list, and I don't read the mails often, I
> admit.  I did take a look at it initially, and I think I did send you
> comments.
>
> My statement may have been a bit strong, since I have not taken a good
look
> at JDOM lately.  I would rather simply see, in the *core*, one tree model
> supported, and I personally think it should be the W3C DOM.

My understanding of the proposal was that there would be *no* tree model
in the core.  Trees would be pluggable with, as James said, potentials
of DOM, DOM-ReadOnly, DOM-Deferred, JDOM, and FOOTREEAPI.  I'd also want
to add a JDOM-Deferred.

-jh-



---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail:     webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail:          general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org






Mime
View raw message