W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > October to December 1997

Re: Comments and requests.

From: Paul Grosso <paul@arbortext.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 09:55:17 -0400
Message-Id: <97Oct17.095613edt.18832@thicket.arbortext.com>
To: www-dom@w3.org
At 07:17 1997 10 17 -0400, Alexandre Rafalovitch wrote:
>On Thu, 16 Oct 1997, Paul Grosso wrote:
>
>> At 21:27 1997 10 15 -0400, Alexandre Rafalovitch wrote:
>> >These are comments on DOM Level 1 document as of 9th of October draft.
>> >
>> >  Am I correct in understanding that comment node should be generated for
>> >  that and returned in getChildren() call, but not in getAttributes()
>> >  call. The alternative is to not represent in-tag comment in DOM. What
>> >  about error nodes. (I know they should not happen, but....)
>> 
>> I don't really know what you mean by error nodes, but in general it may
>> not be possible to define a DOM on erroneous input.  Certainly, the input
>> must be good enough to model before we can define a document object model
>> for it.
>> 
>
>What about the case when it is possible. For example, if you look at html
>source code with errors in Netscape, you would notice, it recovers from
>errors by ignoring part of the input (it is shown in different color).
>This way, you can see where was the error. In the same way an Error node
>would just contains text representation of skipped part and can be ignored 
>by the application processor if not needed. Most probably it could happen
>on any level.

I will have to let others answer for HTML--preferably someone from Netscape
or Microsoft.

XML does not allow a document to have well-formedness errors.  An object
that is not well-formed is not an XML document and is therefore not
addressed by the DOM per the current official position as I understand it.
Therefore, there will be no such thing as an Error node in the DOM for XML.
Received on Friday, 17 October 1997 10:15:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:13:44 GMT