• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• To: "cbullard@h..." <"Len Bullard"@mail.HiWAAY.net>
• Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 22:21:13 -0800

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@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ or CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
Unsubscribe by posting to majordom@i... the message
unsubscribe xml-dev  (or)
unsubscribe xml-dev your-subscribed-email@your-subscribed-address

Please note: New list subscriptions now closed in preparation for transfer to OASIS.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Alternatives to the W3C (was Re: Alternatives to the W3C)
    • From: Len Bullard <cbullard@h...>
  • What's this XML stuff anyway? (was Re: Alternatives to the W3C)
    • From: David Brownell <david-b@p...>
  • Re: Alternatives to the W3C (was Re: Alternatives to the W3C)
    • From: "Robert Hanson" <rhanson@b...>

• Prev by Date: ANNOUNCE. PXSLServlet v 0.2
• Next by Date: More Nonce About CORBA
• Previous by thread: RE: Alternatives to the W3C (was Re: Alternatives to the W3C)
• Next by thread: Re: Alternatives to the W3C (was Re: Alternatives to the W3C)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread