W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > December 2005

SVGT 1.2: General Comment uDOM

From: Eric Seidel <eseidel@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 15:45:13 -0600
Message-Id: <26A6B24F-E7BF-4319-A0F0-BC263E90AB1D@apple.com>
To: www-svg@w3.org

== This message seems to have died somewhere in transit, resending. ==


I would like to echo other's comments, with regard to the uDOM.   
Reading through it, the uDOM seems a particularly odd beast.  It  
seems that the SVG specification would be better served to adopt a  
strict (compatible) sub-set of the DOM 3 specification through  
normative reference, and only make additions to the DOM for SVG-only  
attributes and elements.  As it stands, the uDOM makes several (in  
the eyes of a desktop browser vendor) duplicative (and therefor  
unwelcome) additions the the DOM.  Notably in the areas of text,  
attribute and network communication handling.

I would like to encourage the SVG working group to at least add a  
section further explaining the need for the uDOM as it stands now and  
why the goals of the uDOM (size?) could not have been accomplished  
through the use of a strict-subset of DOM 3.

Furthermore, I would suggest, that if it is the intention of the SVG  
working group to continue requirement of a uDOM implementation, that  
they consider breaking the uDOM out into it's own specification,  
given that it makes generic extensions to DOM3 (like "traits"), which  
should ideally be used by other future languages in a CDF environment  
(such as HTML5/XHTML2.0/MathML).

Received on Wednesday, 28 December 2005 21:45:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:47:05 UTC