Re: Web browsers?

[Michael Eric Menk <mike.klev@siving.hia.no>]

Dominique Devriese wrote:

> Georges Khaznadar writes:
>
>  
>
> > ringe@skolelinux.no a écrit :
> >    
> >
> > ........
>
> > Do you mean that Konqueror now supports DHTML ?
> >    
>
> It does and it has done so for a very long time.  
>
> If you have a problem with a certain website in konqueror, please file
> a bug report on bugs.kde.org instead of trying to cause a flamewar on
> an unrelated list.
>
>  
There is no standard as DHTML, but this is a standard term for dynamic 
web pages.

By DHTML, i assume that you mean client side DHTML. in other word, DOM.

There is a binding to EMCA script v3 to DOM. In DOM L1 CORE includes a 
method that you can ask the browser if it support the DOM module.

According the the browser them self, Konqueror 3.1 is only a little 
better than Opera. And WAY behind Mozilla.

This is according the THE BROWSER THEM SELF...

Mozilla is THE ONLY BROWSER that lackes support for 1 or less method to 
be able to be used with XML4DR and folowing standards at the same time. 
(it lacked 1 method in may 2003, the save method in DOM L3 Load and Save).

Source: 
http://www.menk.priv.no/DOM.pdf
http://www.menk.priv.no/DOM.ps

% support (approx %) of the DOM modules.

MSIE = MSIE 6.5
Mozilla = Mozilla 1.3/1.4
Opera = Opera 7.1
Konq = Konqueror 3.1

DOM L1
MSIE: 50% claimed, 0% practical. (a bug in module, makes it not 
implementet. But it claims to support it)
Mozilla: 100%
Opera 50%
Konq :  100%

DOM L2:
MSIE 0%
Mozilla: <70%
Opera: <30%
Konq: 0%

DOM L3:
MSIE: 0%
Mozilla: 9%
Opera: 0%
Konq: 0%
---
Michael Eric Menk