[jdom-interest] Last call: getChild/getChildren versus getChi
ehartmann at rhinfo.com
Thu Feb 12 01:02:15 PST 2004
I think Parent/Child is more easy to understand for beginners than
Also, with Parent/Child, I clearly understand that the relation may be
recursive: a parent may have a parent...
On Wed, 2004-02-11 at 23:01, Bradley S. Huffman wrote:
> Jason Hunter writes:
> > Do you like things as they are? Parent/Content?
> Mixed. Content goes with getContent and such, but as Elliotte point out, it'd
> be nice to have the same terminology as the big 3 XML specs. (XML 1.0+
> Namespaces+XPath) which talk about "content", "parent", children", "siblings"
> , "descendants", etc.
> But at this point in time Parent/Content or Parent/Child is fine by me. Even
> Node would be fine. But IMHO Container would be a confusing terminology in
> this context.
> To control your jdom-interest membership:
More information about the jdom-interest