Re: cvs: php-src /ext/dom document.c php_dom.c text.c
| From: | Rob Richards | Date: | Thu, 07 Oct 2004 23:24:45 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: cvs: php-src /ext/dom document.c php_dom.c text.c | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.cvs |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-cvs+get-28924@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Thursday 07 October 2004 05:59 pm, Marcus Boerger wrote:
> It makes little to no sense to keep names for BC in an extension that uses
> names based on a spec. Especially when the old names were never published
> as a valid spec. Those names would only blow up the namesspace and lead to
> confusion once people work with the api that only know the spec - and
> wondering what else is there for which they cannot find a spec...
I had thought about this and checked out the specs a bit more. Looking at the
changes they made from the Draft to the Recommendation, trying to stick just
to the specs is a bit overblown and we are allowed to extend them. Some of
the extended functionality is there for convience (easier and faster to use
than if all of level 3 is implemented).
Now take for instance load/save. There was no definition for these in Level 2
(so they could be implemented in any manner). Currently dom uses load,
loadXML, save, saveXML - and these were actually in the Level 3 draft as
convience methods - well no longer - they changed these. I dont think these
should be dropped. There is a whole DOM Load/Save API - about 7 interfaces -
which arent implemented.
I can possibly see removing a few of the props/methods - ones which have the
exact same functionality and aren't standardly used, but then should these
changes be made to the 5_0 branch as well? - Would propose any of these
changes on the xml-dev list.
I see compliance with Level 2 important, but not fully supporting Level 3 isnt
(Level 3 is a little overblown imho).
Rob