W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > January to March 2001

Re: DOMImplementation.hasFeature and 'Core', 'XML' and '1.0'.

From: Martijn Pieters <mj@digicool.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 18:38:39 +0100
To: www-dom@w3.org
Message-ID: <20010219183839.A2471@zopatista.com>
On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 09:01:31AM -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> > In DOM level 1, what are now the 'Core' and 'XML' were together called the
> > 'XML' feature. Returning true on 'XML', '1.0' meant that both the
> > fundamental and the extended interfaces were supported. This was not
> > consistent with the rest of the DOM spec, because the Extended interfaces
> > were optional for 'HTML' feature DOM implementations.
> You seem to be confused.  In DOM Level 1, "Core" was never visible
> as a testable feature revision level ... you asked instead about XML or
> about HTML, and inferred about "core".
> There was no inconsistency ... it was just another hidden feature that
> was implied by something else.  DOM L2 just made it explicit.  Now
> if they'd have done the same thing for bootstrapping and DTD support,
> it would have been better.

Right, I see. The fact that the hasFeature method existed implied that the
'Core' featureset was supported. This makes things a little clearer.

So, should a DOM level 2 implementation return true on hasFeature('Core',
'1.0) or hasFeature('XML', '1.0')? I *think* it should, but would like to
hear confirmation.

Martijn Pieters
| Software Engineer  mailto:mj@digicool.com
| Digital Creations  http://www.digicool.com/
| Creators of Zope   http://www.zope.org/
Received on Monday, 19 February 2001 12:38:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 20 October 2015 10:46:08 UTC