[brailleblaster] Re: Coupld of suggestions
- From: Keith Creasy <kcreasy@xxxxxxx>
- To: "brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 16:37:55 +0000
Right, and in order to make it simpler I thought maybe a reference to the DOM
might live in the Document class. I guess in your current code it would get it
from Semantics?
Yes it is a matter of convenience. I generally do that when the class is
specific to it's parent and is only used there.
Keith Creasy
Software Developer
American Printing House for the Blind
KCreasy@xxxxxxx
Phone: 502.895.2405
Skype: keith537
-----Original Message-----
From: brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John J. Boyer
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 11:29 AM
To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [brailleblaster] Re: Coupld of suggestions
Hi Keith,
Since the Document class is a wrapper for the other classes in the document
package, the method that returns the tree of the parsed document would be in
that class. It can also return the current element, but I think we have to
define what we mean by "current".
I think you are asking whether the StyledContent for the print and Braille
views could be an embedded class. This seems to me to be a matter of
convenience.
John
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 03:09:58PM +0000, Keith Creasy wrote:
> John.
>
> Would it makes sense to have Semantics return a reference to the working DOM
> so that views that just needed access to that could do it without having to
> access Semantics? I'm thinking the document structure (tree) view and perhaps
> an HTML (browser) view. It probably makes sense for them to be able to
> request content from Document. They also need to know which element is the
> current context node in the original XML document. I had thought we'd have a
> member in Document that kept up with the current context node and text
> offset. How had you planned to handle this?
>
> Also, and this is minor, but since the Braille view and text view both use a
> StyledTextView and a Styled Content object could we just put the definition
> of the corresponding StyledContent class a member of it's corresponding view
> class? Does that make any sense? The two are really working in tandem aren't
> they? Common functionality is in the base class anyway, right?
>
> This is looking pretty good.
> Keith Creasy
> Software Developer
> American Printing House for the Blind
> KCreasy@xxxxxxx
> Phone: 502.895.2405
> Skype: keith537
>
--
John J. Boyer; President, Chief Software Developer Abilitiessoft, Inc.
http://www.abilitiessoft.com
Madison, Wisconsin USA
Developing software for people with disabilities
Other related posts:
