Re: State of the AJAX Union
apv <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.perl.modules.lwp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I've also been interested for a long time and tried to work on this 2 years ago but didn't get far enough to bother trying to release anything. DOM could be tackled in an HTML::Tree-->XML::"parser" fashion. That way, bad mark-up could be legitimized and something like XML::LibXML could handle the DOM. I would gladly throw down if there was a group effort with a real plan. I'm not the right hacker to lead this project though. -Ashley On Wednesday, Nov 22, 2006, at 13:01 US/Pacific, Christopher Hart wrote: > I agree that folks have been talking about JS for a long time, and > that it's > frustrating, but what I'm suggesting is that we need to tackle a > different > problem first. > > This isn't an academic question - without knowing how the DOM is going > to > work (or even if there is one), the JS conversation can't be anything > but > theoretical (or, at best, very incomplete in the concrete). > > I'm just trying to see if any work was already going on in this space, > or if > there was any interest in a team effort to attempt it. > > On 11/22/06, Andy Lester <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> On Nov 22, 2006, at 2:51 PM, Christopher Hart wrote: >> >> > Would an "easier" (yet still monumental) starting point be to >> > tackle the DOM >> > implementation independent of a JS engine? >> >> All of this is pointless unless someone is willing to step up and >> JFDI. Otherwise, it's just rehashing the same theoreticals. People >> have been talking to me about adding JavaScript support for years, >> and nobody has ever done it. >> >> http://search.cpan.org/dist/WWW-Mechanize/lib/WWW/Mechanize/ >> FAQ.pod#JavaScript >> >> xoxo, >> Andy >> >> -- >> Andy Lester => [email protected] => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance >>