> Hello Sterling, > > Monday, January 12, 2004, 10:33:08 PM, you wrote: > > >> > In theory, I like the idea of a unified set of XML helper extensions, > >> > but DOM's so big and ugly that I don't know if it plays well with > >> > others in the sandbox. > >> > >> We are not consistent! Not in any way. DOM uses studlyCaps and SimpleXML > >> uses underscores for its method names. Speaking of consistency we should > >> probably discuss whether we want to change all methods of SimpleXML to > >> studlyCaps (we cannot hcnage the DOM method names). Until RC1 i guess we > >> can do such changes if we all agree and see it to be important. > >> > > > Haven't you been reading the thread - there are no more methods! :) > > Ignorance is bliss. > > It makes no sense to drop all methods. IMO that'd be absolute nonsense. >
Why? Every one of these methods can be done with simple xpath queries:
Because it's extremely easy to use! I don't have an opinion on everyone of the methods but giving people the easy way out is great. That's how I see SimpleXML, XML for Dummies!
Andi
hasChildren() getChildren()
==
/child::node()
attributes()
==
/attribute::*
count()
==
count(//self::node())
This is why xpath was invented, and why its there in the first place.
-Sterling
-- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
-- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
