[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Bob Kline <bkline@rksystems.com>
- To: Matt Sergeant <matt@sergeant.org>
- Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 13:43:00 -0400 (EDT)
On Thu, 11 May 2000, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> On Thu, 11 May 2000, Linda Grimaldi wrote:
>
> > [Justifiable puzzlement about twisted use of relationship language]
>
> It's simple... You have an element node, say the method to get the
> children is getChildNodes(), this shouldn't return the attributes or
> the namespace nodes.
>
> However if you've got an attribute node, calling getParent() should
> return the element node.
>
> Does that clear it up a bit?
Only if you accept the premise that it's OK to have "child" and "parent"
take on unusual new meanings. Think of paternity suits, which
illustrate that not all fathers are as eager to acknowledge paternity as
their offspring would like. :->}
--
Bob Kline
mailto:bkline@rksystems.com
http://www.rksystems.com
***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************
|
