- From: Richard A. O'Keefe <ok@atlas.otago.ac.nz>
- Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 11:43:28 +1200 (NZST)
- To: CReitzel@arrakisplanet.com, derhoermi@gmx.net, teague@mailandnews.com
- Cc: ablavier@wanadoo.fr, ac.quick@sympatico.ca, dforcier@macromedia.com, html-tidy@w3.org, info@sl-chat.de
Terry Teague <teague@mailandnews.com> wrote: I was waiting for a future DOM based Tidy to make major architectural changes to my code. Er, why would any sane programmer *WANT* a DOM-based Tidy? The DOM may very possibly be a good way to expose a browser's internal representation to a script, although I have very serious doubts about that, but if there is a worse representation for actually *doing* anything with an XML document I have yet to see it described in print. I hope that my article about problems in the DOM will soon be available on the Web; it's been accepted, reviewed, the contract's signed, and I just have to clear up the reviewer's points. Trouble is, the DOM has so _many_ problems that it's quite a big article. Let me put it this way: the fact that people prefer JDOM to the DOM says really terrible things about DOM.
Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2001 19:44:51 UTC