[jdom-interest] API Inertia

Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo at metalab.unc.edu
Wed May 2 06:15:52 PDT 2001

At 12:22 PM +0200 5/2/01, Noam Tamim wrote:

>Also, now that I've heard all the arguments about having that Item/Node
>interface, I'm not sure I even want it. It can help developers, but it's
>also very confusing because you can't really make your own Node (well, you
>can declare that you class implements Node, but we've seen it doesn't mean

FYI yesterday I realized that I do need to make my own nodes. I'm 
thinking about implementing XPointer which adds two new node types: 
point and range. These are obviously new classes (Point and Range). 
They are also new kinds of nodes in the XPointer data model in 
addition to the standard XPath nodes Element, Document, Text, 
Comment, etc.

So let's not be so sure that we really don't want client programmers 
to create their own Node subclasses/implementations.

| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo at metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
|                  The XML Bible (IDG Books, 1999)                   |
|              http://metalab.unc.edu/xml/books/bible/               |
|   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0764532367/cafeaulaitA/   |
|  Read Cafe au Lait for Java News:  http://metalab.unc.edu/javafaq/ |
|  Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://metalab.unc.edu/xml/     |

More information about the jdom-interest mailing list