Alternatives to the W3C (was Re: Alternatives to the W3C)
rhanson at blast.net
Mon Jan 24 15:02:02 GMT 2000
Wow, I don't know if I can disagree enough with that. What if the goal isn't
to support XML in the browser, but instead is used for indexing, and other
back-end tasks? And what if this same information is also accessible through
a browser with CSS?
For instance, we have in in-house knowledge base. This knowledge base
contains information that needs to be searchable by perhaps a part number.
Parts of this knowledge base also include manuals that are intended for
distribution as printed material (using XSLT). Other parts are indexes
generated by a back end application which does use DOM. And besides that, the
support technician needs access to this information... so with XML and CSS in
the browser, I am all set. Why do I need DOM support in my browser for to do
all of this?
I am not disagreeing that DOM support will be needed in the browser for lots
of applications, but I disagree that there is no point to supporting XML
----- Original Message -----
From: Tim Bray <tbray at textuality.com>
> At 09:40 PM 1/23/00 -0600, Len Bullard wrote:
> >So is DOM really required for XML 1.0, or is that a political position
> >about implementations?
> There is no *point* to supporting XML in the browser if you don't
> support the DOM. If all you want is to display nice-looking stuff
> to humans, HTML does an excellent job of that. -Tim
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ or CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
Unsubscribe by posting to majordom at ic.ac.uk the message
unsubscribe xml-dev (or)
unsubscribe xml-dev your-subscribed-email at your-subscribed-address
Please note: New list subscriptions now closed in preparation for transfer to OASIS.
More information about the Xml-dev