<html>
<font size=3><br>
I am new to JDOM and have been following this discussion. I am also
teaching myself JAVA (C is my background), but I am a long-time SGML and,
by extension, XML heavy. <br>
<br>
I have no problem with getChild because I consider elements as children.
An earlier e-mail suggested this is confusing because PIs and Comments
are also children. Well, that's news to me. Since when is a PI or Comment
a child of an element. If that's in the standard, it must be in the small
print 'cause I missed it. Also, since PIs and Comments are not part of
the document's structure and cannot be declared in a DTD, they cannot be
considered "children."<br>
<br>
The point is moot. getChildElement is redundant. The only
"legitimate" children of a parent element are other elements.
Where is the confusion?<br>
<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>Joe
G.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
At 09:03 PM 7/31/00 -0700, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite>> OK, I'm going to say something that
hopefully James understands (OK,<br>
> James? ;-) ). If someone isn't a committer on this project, we
really<br>
> can't lend them all this extra weight. <br>
<br>
You misunderstand. I can use whatever outside resources and
opinions I<br>
want on deciding how to cast my vote. Now my vote only carries with
it<br>
the weight of one vote (although as a -1 veto that's all the weight
it<br>
needs).<br>
<br>
> I know that I've been guilty as<br>
> anyone - for example, I tend to really listen up when Simon
St.<br>
> Laurent talks, because I think he is top notch in XML land. <br>
<br>
That's nothing to be guilty of. He is top notch, and his opinion
should<br>
weigh into your vote. :-) <br>
<br>
> But votes are first you and I (on core). Then it's the testers
and <br>
> contribers - Elliotte, Jools, Werner, some others... and thnose
<br>
> people decide it. If we still can't get consensus or majority,
<br>
> or whatever, /then/ we go to non-committers.<br>
<br>
Following Apache standards, one committer proposes a change, and
people<br>
vote. It takes three +1 votes and no -1 votes to proceed with
the<br>
change. (Since we have just two core committers, two +1 votes
will<br>
suffice.) We've already had a -1 vote here (that'd be me), so
there's<br>
no need for looking to non-core voters.<br>
<br>
For point of reference, on the earlier null vote you and I were not<br>
fully decided and so looked for outside opinion. (Which again, is
a<br>
good thing.)<br>
<br>
Here I'm up to be swayed by outside opinion. Please continue
sending in<br>
opinions (for and against). But, like I said, I put time into
this<br>
project in the hope that it will make my XML coding life easier and
save<br>
me time and effort. Anything that goes against JDOM making my
life<br>
easier makes me less inclined to put time into JDOM. <br>
<br>
I think (like Philip said) a beginner can figure out that
"Element<br>
getChild(String name)" will return an Element, and it makes my code
look<br>
better and gets my job done faster. And since we looked at the<br>
Collections APIs for whether to return null or not, let me point
out<br>
they shortened the "addElement" name down to just
"add". :-)<br>
<br>
> Once James is a committer (something I hope he throws some patches
<br>
> in for so we could make happen), then I'll listen to him equally
<br>
> as well; until then, it's not fair to the community.<br>
<br>
I just have to say again: Listen to people you know are
smart! I don't<br>
think anyone in this community wants you to ignore expert outside<br>
opinion because the person hasn't contributed patches. The expert
may<br>
not have a binding vote, but you don't need to shut them out.<br>
<br>
-jh-<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
To control your jdom-interest membership:<br>
<a href="http://lists.denveronline.net/mailman/options/jdom-interest/youraddr@yourhost.com" eudora="autourl">http://lists.denveronline.net/mailman/options/jdom-interest/youraddr@yourhost.com</a></font></blockquote></html>