On Sat, 2002-03-23 at 09:36, David Peterson wrote: > > Item 1: Class Names > =================== > > Proposal 1: Preserved Case > --------------------------
+1 > Proposal 2: Pascal Case > ----------------------- 0: I'll go with it if people want it that way. > Item 2: A Generic XPath implementation > ====================================== > > It has been suggested that it would be cool if Jaxen had an object > model-agnostic implementation that determined which implementation of > Navigator was appropriate for an object passed to it by examining it's > class, rather than having to have selected an object model when > constructing the XPath.It has been determined that this functioality > could be added with a subclass of org.jaxen.XPath (as suggested in Item > 1). The downside is that it would be quite a bit less efficient, since > it involves reflection and type checking each time an expression is > executed. > > Question: Should a Generic XPath be implemented? 0: I don't have any problem with it, as long as it's an extension. _______________________________________________ Jaxen-interest mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jaxen-interest
