W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > October to December 1999

Re: DOM L2 comments, various

From: Jeff Mackay <jmackay@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 18:16:26 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <19991004222015.16714.rocketmail@web601.yahoomail.com>
To: www-dom@w3.org
This is really a long, drawn out argument over a very
simple (although marginally philosophical) issue. So
can we boil down the argument to:

Does DOM allow implementors to extend node types
and/or exception types? 

If yes, the specification should be modified with
instructions for implementors that will ensure forward
compatibility. If no, the specification should be
modified to explicitly forbid this practice, and if
conformance tests are ever developed, they should
explicitly test for this. In either case the
specification should be modified to remove ambiguity.

Personally, I would prefer it if the DOM concentrated
on functionality and interoperability, and stayed away
from restricting extensions to the API. But then
again, I'm not yet a member...

------
Jeff Mackay
Vtopia, Inc.
URL: http://www.vtopia.com/


=====

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
Received on Tuesday, 5 October 1999 04:14:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:13:46 GMT