W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > January to March 2000

Re: Comments on DOM 2

From: David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 14:27:15 -0800
Message-ID: <38BD9943.7B974D59@pacbell.net>
To: keshlam@us.ibm.com
Cc: "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
keshlam@us.ibm.com wrote:
> > Comments aren't there for program use, shouldn't be customized.
> I agree in principle, but I'm not willing to bet that way right now. The
> boundary of "program use" is fuzzy.
> Thought experiment: What if the subclassing is being done to make the DOM
> model interoperate with another API appropriate to that document type? A
> comment might still want to be accessible via that alternative view.

Accessible != customizable.

As I said, just because you can use a hubcap as a shovel doesn't
mean such usage should be a basic design consideration for a car.

Likewise, just because legacy non-extensible systems (HTML) do
something does not mean its hacks (e.g. css/JavaScript/... in
comments) and limitations should be the foundation to build on
with a designed-for-extensibility XML future.

- Dave
Received on Wednesday, 1 March 2000 17:27:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 20 October 2015 10:46:06 UTC