W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2003

RE: Action item on syntax-based interoperability

From: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 09:07:59 -0700
Message-ID: <830178CE7378FC40BC6F1DDADCFDD1D1D51679@RED-MSG-31.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Elliotte Rusty Harold" <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>, "Tim Bray" <tbray@textuality.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>

You confuse interoperating data models with interoperating at the API level. The only way things like CSS work is if data models are being shared across browsers not just whether browsers can recognize the CSS syntax. The main problem with interoperability with both the XML and HTML DOMs is that the core definitions are so lacking in functionality that various parties (both open source and proprietary software vendors) have seen fit to embrace and extend them ( I believe your XOM is an example of this). 


From: Elliotte Rusty Harold [mailto:elharo@metalab.unc.edu]
Sent: Wed 10/22/2003 5:48 PM
To: Dare Obasanjo; Tim Bray; www-tag@w3.org
Subject: RE: Action item on syntax-based interoperability

At 3:59 PM -0700 10/22/03, Dare Obasanjo wrote:

>So JavaScript and DHTML is not an interoperable part of the Web?

Of course it it's not, as anybody who uses anything other than
Internet Explorer on Windows knows all too well. It isn't even close
to being an interoperable part of the Web. The sites that use syntax
work. The sites that use DOM and JavaScript don't.

>  Is
>Flash also not part of the Web?

Ditto, though Flash is marginally more interoperable across platforms
than JavaScript and DHTML. That probably has something to do with
Flash not being designed by Microsoft.


   Elliotte Rusty Harold
   Processing XML with Java (Addison-Wesley, 2002)
Received on Thursday, 23 October 2003 12:09:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:40 UTC