http://blogs.msdn.com/mikechampion/archive/2006/11/13/rough-spots-in-the-linq-to-xml-learning-curve.aspx[minor editorial updates 11/13] We've been doing some formal usability testing on all the LINQ components over the last couple of months and have learned a lot about what people find challenging. The results have generally validated LINQ's story as aen-USCommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)http://blogs.msdn.com/mikechampion/archive/2006/11/13/rough-spots-in-the-linq-to-xml-learning-curve.aspx#1070405Mon, 13 Nov 2006 22:14:59 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:1070405Stefan Dobrev<p>I think there will be no huge problems with the &quot;s&quot;, because in one case it will return IEnumerable&lt;T&gt; which can be foreached, and in the other it will simply return XElement, which did not implement IEnumerator&lt;T&gt;, so there will be compile time error.</p> <p>On the other hand this methods Element(...) and Elements(...) look more like GetElement(...) and GetElement(...). Wouldn't be indexer [] syntax be more appropriate? </p>http://blogs.msdn.com/mikechampion/archive/2006/11/13/rough-spots-in-the-linq-to-xml-learning-curve.aspx#1071044Tue, 14 Nov 2006 00:18:08 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:1071044mikechampion<p>You're right about the compile time error. &nbsp;The problem is that the error message in the build we used in the usability testing was fairly generic and unhelpful. &nbsp;The plan of record AFAIK is to fix the message and see if that minimizes the problem.</p> http://blogs.msdn.com/mikechampion/archive/2006/11/13/rough-spots-in-the-linq-to-xml-learning-curve.aspx#1258609Mon, 11 Dec 2006 14:28:40 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:1258609Andreas<p>What about Elements and FirstElement?</p>