• To: "K. Ari Krupnikov" <ari@c...>
• Subject: Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Warsare Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
• From: Berend de Boer <berend@x...>
• Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 09:29:31 +1300
• Cc: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>, xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <r01050400-1021-D8BE0296E68311D6B5470003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]>
• References: <r01050400-1021-D8BE0296E68311D6B5470003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]> <86d6q0ewn2.fsf@p...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2b) Gecko/20021016

K. Ari Krupnikov wrote:

>I disagree. Making something private marks it as unimportant to the
>user (who, as the saying goes, might be you in three months).
>
No, making something private is mainly a hack by languages that don't 
have class invariants. Visibility of features to clients comes secondary 
here.

Regards,

Berend. (-:

• Follow-Ups:
  • [<martin@o...>] Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
    • From: ari@c... (K. Ari Krupnikov)

• References:
  • Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
    • From: ari@c... (K. Ari Krupnikov)

• Prev by Date: Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
• Next by Date: RE: What is XML For?
• Previous by thread: Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
• Next by thread: [<martin@o...>] Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread