Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #14958 > unrolled thread

DOM 0 Reference

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

Contents

  DOM 0 Reference Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> - 2012-07-08 12:56 -0600
    Re: DOM 0 Reference Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-07-09 03:04 +0200
      Re: DOM 0 Reference Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> - 2012-07-08 20:18 -0600
        Re: DOM 0 Reference Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-07-09 16:28 +0200
          Re: DOM 0 Reference Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> - 2012-07-09 12:08 -0600
            Re: DOM 0 Reference Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-07-09 22:24 +0200
          Re: DOM 0 Reference Dr J R Stockton <reply1228@merlyn.demon.co.uk.not.invalid> - 2012-07-10 23:25 +0100
    Re: DOM 0 Reference Dr J R Stockton <reply1228@merlyn.demon.co.uk.not.invalid> - 2012-07-09 20:20 +0100
      Re: DOM 0 Reference Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> - 2012-07-09 20:40 -0600
        Re: DOM 0 Reference Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-07-10 10:26 +0200
        Re: DOM 0 Reference Dr J R Stockton <reply1228@merlyn.demon.co.uk.not.invalid> - 2012-07-11 20:52 +0100
          Re: DOM 0 Reference Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> - 2012-07-11 19:38 -0600
            Re: DOM 0 Reference Dr J R Stockton <reply1228@merlyn.demon.co.uk.not.invalid> - 2012-07-13 21:01 +0100

#14958 — DOM 0 Reference

As many of you know, the DOM 0 API is quite severely lacking
in up-to-date documentation. I've spent the past few weeks
sifting through archived Netscape documentation while documenting
and annotating the parts that have been standardised. The result[0]
is a "reference" for the DOM 0 API.

I've also organised the properties into categories with short
descriptions. One example would be the "Reflective Properties"
section, which illuminates developers on the various types
of "reflection" that can take place between HTML attributes
and DOM properties.

The reference is still a work-in-progress, so any critique is
welcome.

[0]: http://www.fortybelow.ca/Articles/DOM-0-Reference/

-- 
Matt McDonald: Web/Flash Developer; Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#14962

Matt McDonald wrote:

> As many of you know, the DOM 0 API is quite severely lacking
> in up-to-date documentation.

It is not; it only does not bear the title "DOM 0 API Documentation".

> I've spent the past few weeks sifting through archived Netscape
> documentation while documenting and annotating the parts that have
> been standardised. The result[0] is a "reference" for the DOM 0 API.

The parts of DOM Level 0 that have been standardized are part of W3C DOM 
Level 2 HTML, and the HTML5 WD (and related WDs).  I am not convinced at all 
that a DOM 0 API reference is needed anymore.  What is needed, though, is 
up-to-date compatibility and compliance information as standards need to be 
implemented for them to become relevant in everyday programming.

> I've also organised the properties into categories with short
> descriptions. One example would be the "Reflective Properties"
> section, which illuminates developers on the various types
> of "reflection" that can take place between HTML attributes
> and DOM properties.
> 
> The reference is still a work-in-progress, so any critique is
> welcome.
> 
> [0]: http://www.fortybelow.ca/Articles/DOM-0-Reference/

Instead of starting something completely new, it would be better to build on 
existing efforts, such as 
<https://developer.mozilla.org/en/DOM_Client_Object_Cross-Reference>.  You 
might also have noticed that I have a DOM Support Matrix in the queue, much 
like the ECMAScript Support Matrix (which will be updated first).


PointedEars
-- 
Use any version of Microsoft Frontpage to create your site.
(This won't prevent people from viewing your source, but no one
will want to steal it.)
  -- from <http://www.vortex-webdesign.com/help/hidesource.htm> (404-comp.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14963

On 12-07-08 07:04 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

> It is not; it only does not bear the title "DOM 0 API Documentation".

Which is where the problem lies. Many developers do not know
where the DOM 0 begins, and where it ends. The purpose of this
project is to illuminate that boundary along with the API
itself.

> Instead of starting something completely new, it would be better to
> build on existing efforts, such as
> <https://developer.mozilla.org/en/DOM_Client_Object_Cross-Reference>.

Interesting; thanks.

> You might also have noticed that I have a DOM Support Matrix in the
> queue, much like the ECMAScript Support Matrix (which will be
> updated first).

I only use MDN for non-standard features, and even then, the code
samples tend to be below par. I may have to start contributing.

-- 
Matt McDonald: Web/Flash Developer; Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14968

Matt McDonald wrote:

> On 12-07-08 07:04 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> It is not; it only does not bear the title "DOM 0 API Documentation".
> 
> Which is where the problem lies. Many developers do not know
> where the DOM 0 begins, and where it ends.

Why is that relevant anymore?  The runtime environments that had only a pre-
W3C DOM API can be considered extinct now.  The future are not the features 
that we chose to call "DOM Level 0", it is the Web Applications API from the 
HTML5 WD (like it or not), which builds on DOM Level 2 HTML and therefore 
*includes* features that were common to now-extinct runtime environments 
(were in "DOM Level 0").

AISB, what is necessary is up-to-date compatibility and compliance 
information.  Certainly it is important to know that a feature originated 
from "DOM Level 0" (or pre-DOM 2, 3) and should therefore be preferred over 
(or provided as fallback for) more recent features if backwards-
compatibility (or, more likely, runtime efficiency) is important.  But it 
does not matter so much how it worked back then – it matters how it is 
working *now*, *iff* it still does (cf. SOP).

> The purpose of this project is to illuminate that boundary along with the
> API itself.

So far you are attempting to document an obsolete, even then inconsistent 
API (which was the very reason why W3C DOM HTML Level 1 came about).  In 
fact, so far what you documented has already been documented before, and
is still available (but well hidden in the depths of Oracle's website – you 
need to know where to look).

I fail to see the logic in that.  In particular, notions like `Submit.value' 
are likely to cause misconceptions in novices; those notions should belong 
to the past.  Now we have properly defined interfaces like HTMLInputElement 
or HTMLButtonElement, and objects that implement them, instead.

>> Instead of starting something completely new, it would be better to
>> build on existing efforts, such as
>> <https://developer.mozilla.org/en/DOM_Client_Object_Cross-Reference>.
> 
> Interesting; thanks.
> 
>> You might also have noticed that I have a DOM Support Matrix in the
>> queue, much like the ECMAScript Support Matrix (which will be
>> updated first).
> 
> I only use MDN for non-standard features, and even then, the code
> samples tend to be below par. I may have to start contributing.

I said "building on" because I did not want to say that you would have to do 
this on MDN (particularly because I find editing content there rather 
difficult, although I have contributed in the past; it needs to be a lot 
more Wiki than that).  The information is already there (non-standard *and* 
standard), and can be reused.


Regards,

PointedEars
-- 
When all you know is jQuery, every problem looks $(olvable).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14972

On 12-07-09 08:28 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrot

> So far you are attempting to document an obsolete, even then inconsistent
> API (which was the very reason why W3C DOM HTML Level 1 came about).  In
> fact, so far what you documented has already been documented before, and
> is still available (but well hidden in the depths of Oracle's website – you
> need to know where to look).

I also sourced information from the very documents you are
referring to. You recently posted the Oracle reference, which I
later thanked you for.

> I fail to see the logic in that.  In particular, notions like `Submit.value'
> are likely to cause misconceptions in novices; those notions should belong
> to the past.  Now we have properly defined interfaces like HTMLInputElement
> or HTMLButtonElement, and objects that implement them, instead.

I prefer that notation as well.

-- 
Matt McDonald: Web/Flash Developer; Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14979

Matt McDonald wrote:

> On 12-07-09 08:28 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrot
>> So far you are attempting to document an obsolete, even then inconsistent
>> API (which was the very reason why W3C DOM HTML Level 1 came about).  In
>> fact, so far what you documented has already been documented before, and
>> is still available (but well hidden in the depths of Oracle's website –
>> you need to know where to look).
> 
> I also sourced information from the very documents you are referring to.

Be careful, for that might easily constitute copyright infringement.  The 
Mozilla Organization has (AFAIK) acquired explicit permission before 
mirroring the original Netscape DevEdge content (which included the Client-
side JavaScript 1.3 Guide and Reference) at
<http://devedge-temp.mozilla.org/> after the AOL takeover (which apparently 
was completely merged into <https://developer.mozilla.org/> [MDN] on or 
before 2009-01-01 [1]).

> You recently posted the Oracle reference, which I later thanked you for.

It was duly noted at the time.
 

PointedEars, IANAL
___________
[1] <http://web.archive.org/web/20090101044303/http://devedge-
temp.mozilla.org/>
-- 
Prototype.js was written by people who don't know javascript for people
who don't know javascript. People who don't know javascript are not
the best source of advice on designing systems that use javascript.
  -- Richard Cornford, cljs, <f806at$ail$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15010

In comp.lang.javascript message <1608501.oMNUckLgyt@PointedEars.de>,
Mon, 9 Jul 2012 16:28:12, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de>
posted:

>Matt McDonald wrote:
>
>> On 12-07-08 07:04 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>> It is not; it only does not bear the title "DOM 0 API Documentation".
>>
>> Which is where the problem lies. Many developers do not know
>> where the DOM 0 begins, and where it ends.
>
>Why is that relevant anymore?

Remember, Pooh, the words of George Santayana.

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk  Turnpike v6.05  MIME.
  Web  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms and links;
  Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
 No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14982

In comp.lang.javascript message <jtcl5e$ilq$1@dont-email.me>, Sun, 8 Jul
2012 12:56:45, Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> posted:

>As many of you know, the DOM 0 API is quite severely lacking
>in up-to-date documentation. I've spent the past few weeks
>sifting through archived Netscape documentation while documenting
>and annotating the parts that have been standardised. The result[0]
>is a "reference" for the DOM 0 API.
>
>I've also organised the properties into categories with short
>descriptions. One example would be the "Reflective Properties"
>section, which illuminates developers on the various types
>of "reflection" that can take place between HTML attributes
>and DOM properties.
>
>The reference is still a work-in-progress, so any critique is
>welcome.
>
>[0]: http://www.fortybelow.ca/Articles/DOM-0-Reference/


It is useless to me, being written in white on black or thereabouts.

I don't know what your formatting is intended to do, but text can exceed
window width.

The font you have forced on me (font-family: "Georgia", serif;) has
small digits, which I find anti-helpful.

There is no visual distinction between unvisited links, visited ones,
and underlined text.  But perhaps they are not links. They confuse.

I changed ".css" in the head to ".Xcss", and it was greatly improved.

Now you need to make it so that all things which look like links are in
fact links.

It would be better to have your name and a date on each page.

I think it would be useful to include, perhaps in a float-right box, a
brief indication of what has in each place been added in the DOM in
common use.  For example, "Content Insertion Methods" looks very empty,
and I do not know whether it should be.

        "document.write

        The document.write property was, and is, used to write to an
        input stream opened by document.open, which inserts content into
        a document tree."

        But I commonly have used it to insert text into a document not
        so opened, for example by putting
                <script> document.write('It is ', new Date()) </script>
        among my HTML.  Would that not have worked in DOM 0?

I suggest you consult the HTML authoring newsgroup.

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, nr London UK  ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk  IE8 FF8 Op11 Sf5 Cr15
   news:comp.lang.javascript FAQ <http://www.jibbering.com/faq/index.html>.
   <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-index.htm> jscr maths, dates, sources.
   <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/jscr/&c, FAQ items, links.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14986

On 12-07-09 01:20 PM, Dr J R Stockton wrote:

> It is useless to me, being written in white on black or thereabouts.

You have registered this complaint to me before. I will
consider alternative colour schemes.

> I don't know what your formatting is intended to do, but text can exceed
> window width.

The media queries utilised are intended to condense the layout
for environments with small widths. Are you noting text that overflows
its container (e.g. the table of contents), and beyond the client
width?

> The font you have forced on me (font-family: "Georgia", serif;) has
> small digits, which I find anti-helpful.

I will consider alternative serif fonts.

> There is no visual distinction between unvisited links, visited ones,
> and underlined text.  But perhaps they are not links. They confuse.

Every single instance is in fact a link. The styling is intended
to emphasise that. I will consider separate styles for anchor element
pseudo-classes.

> Now you need to make it so that all things which look like links are in
> fact links.

See my reply above.

> It would be better to have your name and a date on each page.

I will also consider this. However, given Thomas' concern raised
regarding copyrighting, I may withhold my name.

> I think it would be useful to include, perhaps in a float-right box, a
> brief indication of what has in each place been added in the DOM in
> common use.  For example, "Content Insertion Methods" looks very empty,
> and I do not know whether it should be.

If I'm interpreting your post correctly, you're requesting the
addition of examples for each feature. I agree with this
suggestion.

> [reference entry for `Document.write`]
>
> But I commonly have used it to insert text into a document not
> so opened, for example by putting
> <script> document.write('It is ', new Date()) </script>
> among my HTML.  Would that not have worked in DOM 0?

`HTMLDocument::write` is specified in both the DOM Level 1 and
Level 2 HTML specifications to:

 > Write a string of text to a document stream opened by open().

which is how I documented it. However, the HTML 5
specification specifies[0] the method with much more
depth, which is in concordance with your assertion that
the documentation is insufficient. This will be amended
to cover the various corner cases.

> I suggest you consult the HTML authoring newsgroup.

HTML or CSS? Your complaints pertain to CSS. Nonetheless,
I will read CIWAH more often, and perhaps request advice.

I'd like to thank you for your thorough critique.

[0]: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/
multipage/elements.html#document.write()

-- 
Matt McDonald: Web/Flash Developer; Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14990

Matt McDonald wrote:

> On 12-07-09 01:20 PM, Dr J R Stockton wrote:
>> It would be better to have your name and a date on each page.
> 
> I will also consider this. However, given Thomas' concern raised
> regarding copyrighting, I may withhold my name.

JFYI: In the event of violation of copyright (or author's rights), 
withholding your name from the pertaining evidence will not shield you from 
being the legitimate target of cease-and-desist letters and criminal 
prosecution.  In fact, doing so could be used in court as evidence against 
you (lack of /mens rea/).


PointedEars, IANAL
-- 
Use any version of Microsoft Frontpage to create your site.
(This won't prevent people from viewing your source, but no one
will want to steal it.)
  -- from <http://www.vortex-webdesign.com/help/hidesource.htm> (404-comp.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15020

In comp.lang.javascript message <jtg4mi$m1e$1@dont-email.me>, Mon, 9 Jul
2012 20:40:18, Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> posted:

>On 12-07-09 01:20 PM, Dr J R Stockton wrote:

>> I don't know what your formatting is intended to do, but text can exceed
>> window width.
>
>The media queries utilised are intended to condense the layout
>for environments with small widths. Are you noting text that overflows
>its container (e.g. the table of contents), and beyond the client
>width?

It overflows the window.  If I start with the window unreasonably
narrow, the text fits well.  As I steadily widen the window, the text
does not steadily widen, but goes in jumps.  The fourth & final jump is
too big.  My initial window size gets that fourth state (and is my
default).  My screen width is like a desk; wider than the widest
reasonable "paper".

That was testing in current Firefox; I cannot test other browsers at
present, as my line has dropped.


>> The font you have forced on me (font-family: "Georgia", serif;) has
>> small digits, which I find anti-helpful.
>
>I will consider alternative serif fonts.

No; consider not setting a basic font, face or size, at all.  That
cannot go wrong, if you test with browsers that still have the "factory"
settings.

Best : just remove the CSS and all that it uses, such as DIVs.

>> There is no visual distinction between unvisited links, visited ones,
>> and underlined text.  But perhaps they are not links. They confuse.
>
>Every single instance is in fact a link. The styling is intended
>to emphasise that. I will consider separate styles for anchor element
>pseudo-classes.

No; consider using the default (with black text on near-white paper;
decoration should be outside the text.  It might be boring, but it is
readable.


>> Now you need to make it so that all things which look like links are in
>> fact links.
>
>See my reply above.
>
>> It would be better to have your name and a date on each page.
>
>I will also consider this. However, given Thomas' concern raised
>regarding copyrighting, I may withhold my name.

Ignore Thomas.  On computing languages, he is commonly giving a correct
answer, but not necessarily to the intended question.

>> I think it would be useful to include, perhaps in a float-right box, a
>> brief indication of what has in each place been added in the DOM in
>> common use.  For example, "Content Insertion Methods" looks very empty,
>> and I do not know whether it should be.
>
>If I'm interpreting your post correctly, you're requesting the
>addition of examples for each feature. I agree with this
>suggestion.

You are not, though.  I mean, for example, that where in the "Content
Insertion Methods" page you name and describe  document. close open
write writeln  , you could also name could also name the context
insertion methods added for each later DOM number.


-- 
 (c) John Stockton, nr London, UK.    ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk     Turnpike v6.05.
 Website  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - w. FAQish topics, links, acronyms
 PAS EXE etc. : <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/programs/> - see in 00index.htm
 Dates - miscdate.htm estrdate.htm js-dates.htm pas-time.htm critdate.htm etc.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15025

On 12-07-11 01:52 PM, Dr J R Stockton wrote:

> It overflows the window.  If I start with the window unreasonably
> narrow, the text fits well.  As I steadily widen the window, the text
> does not steadily widen, but goes in jumps.  The fourth & final jump is
> too big.  My initial window size gets that fourth state (and is my
> default).  My screen width is like a desk; wider than the widest
> reasonable "paper".

So your screen width is > 800px and < 1280px then. I designed
the layout for 1280px, but I can already see the folly of such a
layout (ignoring 1024px). The widths are expressed in ems, but
should probably be swapped for percentage values for the width
range of > 640px (ems work very well for small screens).

> No; consider not setting a basic font, face or size, at all.  That
> cannot go wrong, if you test with browsers that still have the "factory"
> settings.

And with many browsers allowing a custom default font, this seems
like an interesting option. On Opera 12 in Linux Mint, I've noticed
that the default serif font *does* have larger numerals. I will
test on some other operating systems to confirm.

> No; consider using the default (with black text on near-white paper;
> decoration should be outside the text.  It might be boring, but it is
> readable.

I agree; that scheme has been stewing in my mind since your
first reply. I have a set four-colour scheme that I design with,
but I can make an exception for articles (though this probably
means that you would dislike other pages I've designed with the
same scheme).

> You are not, though.  I mean, for example, that where in the "Content
> Insertion Methods" page you name and describe  document. close open
> write writeln  , you could also name could also name the context
> insertion methods added for each later DOM number.

So, a list of changes for each successive DOM API specification
(i.e. level)? The above snippet appears to have some typos, so
I apologise if I'm misconstruing your post.

My Usenet manners are also quite primitive, so please let me know
if this discussion should be continued on a more fitting newsgroup,
such as CIWAS.

-- 
Matt McDonald: Web/Flash Developer; Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15041

In comp.lang.javascript message <jtl9r7$n5k$1@dont-email.me>, Wed, 11
Jul 2012 19:38:47, Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> posted:

>On 12-07-11 01:52 PM, Dr J R Stockton wrote:
>
>> It overflows the window.  If I start with the window unreasonably
>> narrow, the text fits well.  As I steadily widen the window, the text
>> does not steadily widen, but goes in jumps.  The fourth & final jump is
>> too big.  My initial window size gets that fourth state (and is my
>> default).  My screen width is like a desk; wider than the widest
>> reasonable "paper".
>
>So your screen width is > 800px and < 1280px then. I designed
>the layout for 1280px, but I can already see the folly of such a
>layout (ignoring 1024px). The widths are expressed in ems, but
>should probably be swapped for percentage values for the width
>range of > 640px (ems work very well for small screens).

My screen width is 1920 px (1080 px height), my general-purpose window
width is about 1150px.

>> No; consider not setting a basic font, face or size, at all.  That
>> cannot go wrong, if you test with browsers that still have the "factory"
>> settings.
>
>And with many browsers allowing a custom default font, this seems
>like an interesting option. On Opera 12 in Linux Mint, I've noticed
>that the default serif font *does* have larger numerals. I will
>test on some other operating systems to confirm.

The point is that the user should be happy with the unaltered font face
and size, and has the ability to change those settings.  He also has
Zoom, and perhaps Zoom Text Only.


>> No; consider using the default (with black text on near-white paper;
>> decoration should be outside the text.  It might be boring, but it is
>> readable.
>
>I agree; that scheme has been stewing in my mind since your
>first reply. I have a set four-colour scheme that I design with,
>but I can make an exception for articles (though this probably
>means that you would dislike other pages I've designed with the
>same scheme).

Undoubtedly.


>> You are not, though.  I mean, for example, that where in the "Content
>> Insertion Methods" page you name and describe  document. close open
>> write writeln  , you could also name could also name the context
>> insertion methods added for each later DOM number.
>
>So, a list of changes for each successive DOM API specification
>(i.e. level)? The above snippet appears to have some typos, so
>I apologise if I'm misconstruing your post.

Yes, just the new names.  "could also name" was alas duplicated.

>My Usenet manners are also quite primitive, so please let me know
>if this discussion should be continued on a more fitting newsgroup,
>such as CIWAS.

There is a current thread "Text color complaints" in CIWAS.

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, nr London UK.  ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk  DOS 3.3 6.20 ; WinXP.
   Web  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links.
   PAS EXE TXT ZIP via  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/programs/00index.htm>
   My DOS  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/batfiles.htm> - also batprogs.htm.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript

csiph-web