Confusing W3C DOM with JavaScript

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • drhowarddrfinedrhoward

    Confusing W3C DOM with JavaScript

    I am learning JavaScript along with the W3C DOM and web programming at the
    same time. Just when I thought I had the basics figured out I had a wrench
    thrown into my understanding.

    When you go to Netscapes JavaScript specs page, they list pages for versions
    1.3 through 1.5. I sat down to read the client side information but it is
    labeled as "obsolete". But if I go to version 1.5 there is no information
    about client side programming. In particular, opening windows, navigator,
    etc.

    Now, if you look at the W3C DOM, I can't find anything there about opening
    windows(etc.). Opera's information talks about supporting "non-standard"
    functions such as "windows", etc. But this "non-standard" statement,
    coupled with Netscapes "obsolete" tag makes me think the ability to open
    other windows is part of the W3C DOM, which it is not.

    So...my beliefs now are that the W3C DOM should only be taken as
    manipulation of documents and their contents while the "non-standard"
    instructions [windows.open()] can be used for windows controls along with
    their inherint cross-browser problems.

    Or not?


  • Andrew Thompson

    #2
    Re: Confusing W3C DOM with JavaScript

    On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 19:08:14 -0500, drhowarddrfined rhoward wrote:
    [color=blue]
    > I am learning JavaScript along with the W3C DOM and web programming at the
    > same time.[/color]

    Do you have a full head of hair?
    Take a photograph, later you will be
    able to look at it, and remember. ;-)
    [color=blue]
    > When you go to Netscapes JavaScript specs page,[/color]

    Netscape/Mozilla are still pushing the <EMBED>
    element, even though it is never accepted as
    valid HTML by the only reference on HTML that
    matters, the W3C.
    ....[color=blue]
    > Now, if you look at the W3C DOM, I can't find anything there about opening
    > windows(etc.).[/color]

    'Opening windows' implies either frames or pop-ups.

    Neither of these is supported in HTML 4.01 strict,
    though they are defined in HTML 3.2.

    But you have a bigger problem if you target either
    frames or new windows. You will be fighting against
    what users want, and browser manufacturers are finally
    giving them, complete control over their own browser
    and desktop environment.
    [color=blue]
    > Or not?[/color]

    My advice is, use the W3C to validate your HTML,
    then test in the major browsers. Anything less
    and you will end with 'another broken web-page'.

    --
    Andrew Thompson
    http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
    http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
    http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology

    Comment

    • Berislav Lopac

      #3
      Re: Confusing W3C DOM with JavaScript

      drhowarddrfined rhoward wrote:[color=blue]
      > I am learning JavaScript along with the W3C DOM and web programming
      > at the same time. Just when I thought I had the basics figured out I
      > had a wrench thrown into my understanding.
      >
      > When you go to Netscapes JavaScript specs page, they list pages for
      > versions
      > 1.3 through 1.5. I sat down to read the client side information but
      > it is labeled as "obsolete". But if I go to version 1.5 there is no
      > information about client side programming. In particular, opening
      > windows, navigator, etc.
      >
      > Now, if you look at the W3C DOM, I can't find anything there about
      > opening windows(etc.). Opera's information talks about supporting
      > "non-standard" functions such as "windows", etc. But this
      > "non-standard" statement, coupled with Netscapes "obsolete" tag makes
      > me think the ability to open other windows is part of the W3C DOM,
      > which it is not.[/color]

      Each browser has its own implementation of DOM, including the window object
      as a part of it. Use these pages:

      For Mozilla/Netscape: http://www.mozilla.org/docs/dom/domref/
      For MSIE:
      Find official documentation, practical know-how, and expert guidance for builders working and troubleshooting in Microsoft products.

      try.asp

      Berislav

      --
      If the Internet is a Marx Brothers movie, and Web, e-mail, and IRC are
      Groucho, Chico, and Harpo, then Usenet is Zeppo.


      Comment

      • Lasse Reichstein Nielsen

        #4
        Re: Confusing W3C DOM with JavaScript

        "drhowarddrfine drhoward" <drhowarddrfine @sbcglobal.net> writes:
        [color=blue]
        > So...my beliefs now are that the W3C DOM should only be taken as
        > manipulation of documents and their contents[/color]

        Correct. "DOM", in that context stands, for *Document* Object Model,
        and it is the object model of the document only.

        However, "DOM" is also customarily used about the entire host
        environment in the browser, including the functionality that was
        originally in Netsacape 2 and 3, and has been kept for backwards
        compatability, even though it is not part of any standard.

        W3C has defined DOM versions 1, 2, and 3. You will often see the
        traditional, non-W3C, functionality referred to as DOM 0.
        [color=blue]
        > while the "non-standard" instructions [windows.open()] can be used
        > for windows controls along with their inherint cross-browser
        > problems.[/color]

        Indeed.

        Much of it is pretty "de facto" standardized, but each browser also
        has its own "<browser> DOM" (e.g., "The IE DOM") where again, "DOM" is
        being used without a clear definition of what "D" stands for (although
        it could be "Domain Object Model", that would actually make sense).

        /L
        --
        Lasse Reichstein Nielsen - lrn@hotpop.com
        DHTML Death Colors: <URL:http://www.infimum.dk/HTML/rasterTriangleD OM.html>
        'Faith without judgement merely degrades the spirit divine.'

        Comment

        Working...