From: "James Britt (rubydev)" <james@...>
Date: 2001-09-30T04:12:02+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:21831] Re: ANN: HtmlDomGenerator 0.1

<snip />

> Well, since the DOM API is a very specific, ummm, specification, it's
> misleading to call it a DOM parser unless it implements that API.  As
> for lack of validation, just toss "non-validating" in front of
> whatever else you call it :-)

There are all sorts of document object models, any of which
could be referred to as a "DOM".  The W3C has a particular
specification that defines their view of a DOM, and, as
they did with XML schemas, they just unfortunately happened to 
use a generic name for the spec.

So, if someone wants to refer to the W3C DOM, they should
probably use the phrase 'W3C DOM Level 1', or whatever level
is of concern.  Other people shouldn't be precluded from
referring to a particular document object model as a DOM.

Now, that said, I understand that many people assume that
there is only One True DOM, and it's perhaps best not to
confuse people if it can be avoided.  But this could be
cleared up in the RAA description with a statement that this
is a distinct DOM API, not a W3C-defined API.


James

> 
> 
> David
> 
> -- 
>