• From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@g...>
• To: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@m...>, Manos Batsis <m.batsis@b...>,xml-dev@l..., XML-INTEREST@J...
• Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 22:15:31 +0200

> From: Joshua Allen [mailto:joshuaa@m...]
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 4:32 AM
> To: Manos Batsis; xml-dev@l...; XML-INTEREST@J...
> Subject: RE: DOM 2 and .NET
>
>
> > > In the case of the "extra" stuff, pretty much every DOM
> implementation
> > > adds some extra stuff to cover things not covered in the spec, such
> as
> > > loading, saving, XPath, etc.  These particular three have
> > > been in MSXML
> >
> > (which after all, are proprietary) focused on implementing better
> > implementations of the actual DOM specs.
>
> Do you mean more complete implementations?  Your frustrations with
> coding to different DOM specs and having to maintain three different
> bodies of code are something I can sympathize with -- for W3C/DHTML DOM.
> In my experience, though, the major popular XML DOM implementations are
> pretty much 100% complete.  I haven't experienced any of the major XML

How about conformant DOM level 2 support in MSXML3/4? createElementNS and
related methods are missing, creating a lot of confusion everywhere...

• References:
  • RE: DOM 2 and .NET
    • From: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Against the Grain: Pascal commentary about XML and databases
• Next by Date: Re: ambo, duo, eorundem, haec & quae
• Previous by thread: RE: DOM 2 and .NET
• Next by thread: SV: DOM 2 and .NET
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread