David Megginson ak117 at
Wed Dec 31 02:42:07 GMT 1997

Paul Grosso writes:

 > >My guess is that the level-one DOM includes comments only to support
 > >messed-up HTML-related tools that hide what should be processing
 > >instructions in comments.  I don't know if we really want to dirty
 > >ourselves with this in XML, unless we can come up with a compelling reason.
 > Your guess is wrong.
 > The DOM has several reference applications including editors and
 > data repositories, and retention of comments is a requirement for
 > these applications.  This is true for XML and has nothing to do 
 > with "dirty" use of comments in HTML.

Yes, but is the level-one DOM the right place for such information?

The preservation of comments is certainly important for authoring
tools, but _much_ more important is the preservation of general entity
references in data and in attribute values, neither of which the
current draft of the level-one DOM supports.

Perhaps both comments and general entity references belong more
properly in a level-two DOM rather than in level one, since they deal
with lexical issues rather than logical structure.

All the best,


David Megginson                 ak117 at
Microstar Software Ltd.         dmeggins at

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