Jonathan Robie jwrobie at
Mon Dec 29 16:21:13 GMT 1997

At 07:42 AM 12/27/97 -0500, David Megginson wrote:
>* David's Model:
>  PARSER --> SAX-J --> DOM --> [tree-based user application]
>               |
>               --------------> [event-based user application]
>In other words, a DOM builder would be just another an event-based
>SAX-J application.
This is precisely the way I see it.

For those who think we need something simpler than the DOM, please explain
what it is that you would supply, and how it is simpler than the DOM. To
me, the part of the DOM that deals with elements and attributes seems about
as simple as you can get.

For those who think that web hackers can't grok the DOM, can web hackers
grok dynamic HTML? Didn't the DOM start out as a way to do a
browser-independent version of dynamic HTML? Yes, it has added
functionality since then, but I think that the part of the DOM that web
hackers need is also easily understood by web hackers. On the other hand,
better documentation for this subset would be useful, but the standard
isn't finished yet...

jonathan at
Texcel Research

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at
Archived as:
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list