Lists Home |
Date Index |
> > > batch (or ??)- DOM: A single method loads the document in-memory.
> > > app
> > > then navigates at its leisure
> > Ok, but I would consider this pull as well. Why do you not
> think that
> > pull concept applies here. Instead of telling the parser
> what to load
> as in
> > your pull explanation above, you are in a way telling it to load the
> > document and make all nodes relavant. Then I think we are
> in the pull
> > concept area again?
> The words pull and push refer to a parsing (or less technically, a
> model. Loading everything into the DOM and fiddling the DOM
> object model
> not a parsing model or a processing one at that.
I never said it was, I was refering to the underlying parser for DOM. In my
push - an implementation where the parser alerts the program of different
tokens, in our case different XML nodes (tags, data, etc...).
pull - the parser collects the data to later create a data structure
representation of it for the program.
That's what I've got as an understanding of it. If I am wrong is not due to
my lack of reading about the subject, but rather to the lack of a clear
explanation on a programmers level, not an English/Philosopher theory on the
subject of a correct definition.
> these terms is
> folly. There is enough confusion in the XML world as it is
> where people
> agree on the meanings of words specified and defined in RFCs and W3C
> don't complicate it further by changing the agreed upon
> meaning of words
> on a
I'm not trying to change anything, rather am trying to figure out what is it
exactly you and others agreed upon here. I've heard three different peoples
point of view here, that does not necessarily agree with yours.
> > > Sounds like we may need to standardize terms here...
> > That's what I am after. I just want to make sure that the terms can
> > refered to in some sort of a document, thread, online
> resource, etc...
> Or I
> > can just read everything about push and pull at this time
> and disagree
> > agree based on my view. Standardizing the terms and the meanings,
> > have something to refer to, even if someone's view (like mine:-) is
> > different.
> The meanings of these words are already standardized, you're the first
> I've ever seen disagree with them.
Where is it published? That's actually what I've been looking for. I also
don't consider a search on google, that comes up with thousands of resources
Again, I don't disagree with anything, I am just trying to get a clear
(normal termininology) meaning of this, sort of like Clark and Jeff did in a
few of their posts.
You were very helpful too, but I just disagreed with your point, or maybe I
just misunderstood it.
> THINGS TO DO IF I BECOME AN EVIL OVERLORD #118
> If I have equipment which performs an important function, it will not
> be activated by a lever that someone could trigger by accidentally
> on when fatally wounded.
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com