Re: [Libxmlplusplus-general] Property renamed to Attribute

[murrayc t-online de (Murray Cumming)]

On Wed, 2002-11-20 at 14:49, Christophe de VIENNE wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Le Mercredi 20 Novembre 2002 14:31, Murray Cumming a écrit :
> > On Sat, 2002-11-16 at 15:30, Christophe de Vienne wrote:
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > > The Property class has been renamed to Attribute.
> > > However, since it's like this in libxml, I kept the 'properties' word
> > > instead of attributes.
> >
> > I just asked on the libxml list. The use of the term "Prop" in the
> > libxml API seems to be a mistake that's being kept for compatability.
> > Apparently "properties" are something else. Let's fix it in libxml++.
> 
> But if I read well the thread you're refering to, attributes is not the real 
> word either (there is this InfoSet stuff)...

I understood that to mean:
"properties" is terminology used in the InfoSet, but people don't know
about InfoSet so it doesn't confuse them to use the wrong terminology in
libxml.

> So the question is, do we choose the more 'logical' (attributes), or keep 
> closest to libxml API (properties) ?
> 
> I personnaly have no real preference, so we can change it to Attributes since 
> you care.
> We'll have to precise this well in the documentation.

I don't think it will matter much, unless they have used libxml, because
everyone expects us to use "attributes".

-- 
Murray Cumming
murray usa net
www.murrayc.com