[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: The DOM: the realist and the implementer
Didier PH Martin wrote: > Hi, > > The realist point of view: > maybe, the W3C DOM WG sees the issue of impedance mismatch between > components caused by the evolution of interfaces as an implementer issue. If > that is the case, then let's create an XML-Dev recommendation. > > The implementer point of view: > Yee, we did it for SAX, let's do it for DOM components. > > a) the first task is then to specify mechanism used by a DOM client to query > a DOM provider about its DOM level support. The interfaces stay as the W3C > workgroup defined it for each level. What do you feel is needed beyond the current W3C DOM standard methods for querying the levels and modules of support in a DOM implementation? COM/DCOM is already anticipated to divide into separate interfaces for expansion, because that is how that object model handles expansion. Different models/bindings have the freedom to expand in the way most suitable to the binding. Don't expect every other language to follow suite, for example in Javascript where expansion is simply done directly to the object -- even if it is just COM objects supplying the implementation because an IDispatch approach is taken to supply a non-segmented interface if I understand it correctly. Ray Whitmer ray@x... xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ or CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 Please note: New list subscriptions now closed in preparation for transfer to OASIS.
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|