W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > October to December 2000

Alternate DOMs (was Re: How can I put a DocumentFragment in a Document?)

From: Michael Champion <mchamp@mediaone.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 23:46:36 -0500
Message-ID: <01b001c05376$07d0e1b0$6501a8c0@mikechampion>
To: <www-dom@w3.org>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Claude Zervas" <claude@utlco.com>
To: <www-dom@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2000 10:15 PM
Subject: Re: How can I put a DocumentFragment in a Document?


> I think this is just one of the many problems with the DOM that came from
its browser/scripting heritage (such as Node.previous/nextSibling()) that
warrants a better specification for efficient server-side use. The current
spec also encourages bloated implementations (Xerces 1.2 is 1.5 megs!),
which make them difficult to use in slim client apps or applets.
> I recall that there where a number of people on the early DOM 1.0 lists
that where in favor of creating a parallel spec for server-side or
thin-client applications. If anybody would like to participate please let me
know and perhaps we could start an "Alternate DOM" working group. JDOM has
been doing something similar, but it is Java-centric.

We've talked about defining a "Server DOM" or "Lite DOM" for a long time,
but this has never been a high priority for the Working Group as a whole.  I
would hope that any Alternate DOM effort could stay on open and friendly
terms with the W3C WG and IG, even if there's little likelihood that it
would get actual W3C endorsement any time soon.  In my very humble and
personal opinion, the JDOM people would have made better progress had they
operated more in the spirit of friendly collaboration with the DOM WG than
by setting up the W3C DOM API as the thing they defined themselves in
opposition to.

As one possiblity, those in the W3C who *are* interested might submit an
"alternate DOM" proposal that gets drafted by some outside group (with some
collaboration by DOM WG members)  in hopes of being published as a W3C Note.
This would politely ask the W3C in its collective wisdom to ask the DOM
working group to consider the proposal; it would not give it any blessing
from the W3C, but would at least put the proposed subset of the spec in a
place where people could find it.

So, what advice might other WG members offer those interested in defining a
"server DOM" subset?   - Start a discussion on this mailing list?
- Open a public sub-list on the W3C server to encourage discussion?
- Go over to sml-dev@egroups.com and hang out with your soulmates?
- Propose an OASIS activity?
- Wait until your cellphone has a couple of MB of RAM, then use Xerces? :~)

I personally would like to see some preliminary discussions on this list,
and then if there is sufficient interest (and not too much outright
opposition), to ask the W3C to open a public sub-list for the actual
discussions.  If a consensus emerges on a subset, I (at least) would be glad
to try to get it through the Submissions process -
http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Process-19990509#Submission
Received on Monday, 20 November 2000 23:44:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:13:48 GMT