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 12:32:13 -0700
Message-ID: <830178CE7378FC40BC6F1DDADCFDD1D1D5167F@RED-MSG-31.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Elliotte Rusty Harold" <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>, "Tim Bray" <tbray@textuality.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>

I see, instead of countering or agreeing with my point you throw an anti-Microsoft slur instead. Either way, the point still stands that web technologies like CSS are based on shared data models not just shared syntax. Syntax based interop is a great start but it isn't the end all and be all of interoperability on the Web.  


From: Elliotte Rusty Harold [mailto:elharo@metalab.unc.edu]
Sent: Thu 10/23/2003 10:34 AM
To: Dare Obasanjo; Tim Bray; www-tag@w3.org
Subject: RE: Action item on syntax-based interoperability

At 9:07 AM -0700 10/23/03, Dare Obasanjo wrote:
>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).

XOM neither embraces or extends the DOM. It replaces it. I would have
a lot less problem with Microsoft's XML APIs if Microsoft would stop
pretending these were DOM, and instead call them something else.


   Elliotte Rusty Harold
   Processing XML with Java (Addison-Wesley, 2002)
Received on Thursday, 23 October 2003 15:37:24 UTC

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