[jdom-interest] A plea for the orphans

Jason Hunter jhunter at acm.org
Thu Sep 21 14:20:40 PDT 2000

Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> At 2:13 PM -0700 9/16/00, Jason Hunter wrote:
> >A problem with this is that our String representation of text can't have
> >a getParent() and that's a bit unfortunate but not (imho) unfortunate
> >enough to switch to having a Text class.
> >
> How about if I tossed in that it would eliminate the need for a CDATA
> class since a Text class could easily have an isCDATA property with
> appropriate getter and setter methods? Then we'd be adding one class
> and removing one. Is that fortunate enough to switch you?

I'm not worried about class count but rather intellectual overhead. 
When I first yearned for something like JDOM one core reason was I
wanted those darn strings to be represented as Strings.  

I don't very much like the idea that getMixedContent() would return a
Text instance while getText() returns a String.  That's confusing I
think.  And to not have getText() return a String diminishes the APIs


More information about the jdom-interest mailing list