Re: The DOM is not a model, it is a library!

----- Original Message -----
From: Christian Roth <rothc@informatik.tu-muenchen.de>
To: DOM Mailing List <www-dom@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 5:18 PM
Subject: Re: The DOM is not a model, it is a library!


>
> Leaving this door explicitly open might help get implementors to adopt
> the DOM API as the basis of their implementation efforts. Closing it by
> reserving everything to W3C could (IMHO) lead to the contrary: "Why
> should I support the DOM API at all, if I have to find clumsy
> work-arounds to be conforming and reach my goals? Then, I can as well
> settle on a fully proprietary solution." And there goes _any_
> interoperability...
>
> This is just my opinion, and as ever, I might be completely wrong here.

I agree with what Christian Roth said; all I meant by "obviously limits
interoperability" is the boringly obvious assertion that proprietary
extensions generally only work in one implementation, so code that uses them
won't work with other implementations.

I'd be very receptive to specific suggestions as to how we can tweak the
Level 2 spec to make it more extendible, e.g. making the space of reserved
names and numeric codes explicit up front.

Mike

Received on Tuesday, 5 October 1999 19:55:36 UTC