Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

W3C Approves DOM Level 2

Posted by timothy on from the next-is-the-decon-level dept.

techsoldaten writes "Web developers rejoice! W3C announced yesterday the DOM Level 2 specification has become a full recommendation. Article about it on Infoworld. The payoff for Web developers, once this recommendation has been incorporated into browsers, is cross-browser DOM scripting should become a thing of the past and XHTML will be available as a means of handling some data-related tasks within a Web page. One hole in the silver lining: the specification is not backwards compatible with DOM Level 1."

3 of 29 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Cross-browser scripting by techsoldaten · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Depends on what you mean. With a single, unified DOM, there is no need to script for several browsers. Therefore, one would be writing code for the DOM, not a browser.

    On the other hand, you really end up with an extra browser for a while, since DOM 2 is not backwards compatible.

    M

  2. Incorporation into Browsers by cbv · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The payoff for Web developers, once this recommendation has been incorporated into browsers [...]

    ... which will be like, uhm, dunno, never?

    There's not even ONE browser available TODAY, that FULLY implements HTML4 or CSS2 - regardless that their respective developers say otherwise.

  3. Re:Throwing the baby out with the bathwater by Tumbleweed · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sorry, I misstated my problems. They're with CSS, not with XHTML. But if you go with strict XHTML, you really shouldn't be doing placement with tables, etc., as is common with HTML-based sites.

    I can make an HTML 4 site using tables for placement that works well (pixel-pefect in most cases) with the vast majority of browsers, more quickly, and with less code, than I can with XHTML/CSS, because you have to specify so many different things via CSS, it takes up a lot of code.

    Yes, it makes it harder to update, but most sites don't get updated all that much, anyway. And I can make sites that are fairly easy to update with regular HTML, anyway. Making a clearly-commented HTML template that my customers can then edit later on is a LOT easier than the equivalent with XHTML/CSS. This stuff is just way too complicated, now, and defeats one of the great things about HTML, that it was _easy_.