I read the W3Cs info on the DOM, but I have to say I didn’t find it particularly helpful. (They lost me pretty quickly.) Like most things the W3C does, it seems as if the main importance of the DOM is in standardization. If the rules are the same all the time, it’s easier for everyone to use—those developing the web, and those using the web. Browser vendors are forced to conform to a set of rules, and as a result, things like JavaScript run more efficiently across browsers. Everything works all the time, and everyone’s happy.
I, personally, am pretty neutral as far as the DOM is concerned. I don’t love it as much as, say, chocolate, and I don’t hate it as much as, for example, Nazi’s. So I guess it falls somewhere in the middle of that. Actually, it’s pretty logical, and for the most part, makes sense. The thing I think the book always leaves out is the practical application. I pretty much get the structure of it, but how do I use it? The example we did in class helped a little, but I really don’t think I’m understanding the true power of the DOM just yet.
(Sorry, I’d write a better posting, but all my brain power is currently reserved for JavaScript use.)
7 comments:
I do agree with you on the W3C, they use a lot of acronyms, and how fast a few simple sentences can leave one wondering if the folks at MIT (another one) are writing the "stuff." It does kind of make sense what it (DOM) is doing and how it works. I just wonder how it does what it does (guess I should pick up the DOMi for FireFox); I guess it is running behind the scenes and the DOM does its fine job and we can continue eating chocolate and watching online videos on a compliant browser!
You're right my brain power is running on dead. You could say my batteries died. An interesting side note as far as standardization goes. I'm for standardization 100 percent but i did come across some sites where programming nerds were complaining that the standards pushed down are old technology. Im not sure i agree with them but i couldn't argue the point anyways so I'm going swiss on this. But it did raise an interesting thought about what will be available in the future as far as new ways to interact with the Objects in the DOM structure. From what i read there are other languages that are working on their own forms of scripting languages. It would be interesting to know if in 10 years JavaScript is still being used at all.
I agree with you on the W3C too, because it has been a browser with alot of acronyms.
Ugh, I've got to agree with the brain power running on empty. Not just with JavaScript, but this week.
Anyway, the acronym DOM makes me think of ROM like CD-ROM, ya know? Yeah, but I've got nothing against it... as far as I'm aware. >_>
This week's posting has been entertaining. Or maybe I am so tired everything is funny.
Some days I think I should get some poster board and tack it up over my desk, so I can make a chart of all of these acronyms. Maybe poster board wouldn't be big enough.
I found the W3C was easy to get lost on what they were trying to say on the DOM. I also think that if the standards are the same across the board then everyone is happy.
Post a Comment