RE: [xml-dev] the challenges of 'extensible'

["Rushforth, Peter" <Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca>]

 Hi Simon,
 
Thanks for your summary.

> I'd strongly encourage XML folks to explore the HTML Web Components
> conversation.  In some ways, it's the Web community attempting to do for
> itself what the XML community tried to do for them a decade and a half
> ago.  The HTML side has a mostly understood set of tools for specifying
> appearance, accessibility, and behavior.
> 
> For a quick intro, I recommend "A Detailed Introduction To Custom
> Elements":
> 
> <http://coding.smashingmagazine.com/2014/03/04/introduction-to-custom-
> elements/>
> 
> The breakdowns tend to come at the intersections of those, which are
> generally in the DOM, which is an object model, so...
> 
> Spending time in HTML reminds me rapidly of how lucky XML was to be able
> to develop alternatives to the DOM.  Despite the "it's a standard, thou
> shalt use it" attitude of some, we weren't locked into it the same way
> that HTML folks were.  In particular, we haven't tried to hang
> _everything_ off of it, at least not very often.
> 

 Isn't the DOM the backbone of interoperability in browsers, isn't it the thing that allows
(many) frameworks to exist?

If Web Components works, won't it be because of the DOM?  The DOM being what
can be produced by virtue of the browser understanding the document type, per
REST / media types.  In fact, isn't the DOM the original "REST API"?

Cheers,
Peter Rushforth