This document is also available in these non-normative formats: XML file, plain text, PostScript file, PDF file, single HTML file, and ZIP file.
Copyright ©2004 W3C® (MIT, ERCIM, Keio), All Rights Reserved. W3C liability, trademark, document use and software licensing rules apply.
This specification defines the Document Object Model Core Level 3, a platform- and language-neutral interface that allows programs and scripts to dynamically access and update the content, structure and style of documents. The Document Object Model Core Level 3 builds on the Document Object Model Core Level 2 [DOM Level 2 Core].
This version enhances DOM Level 2 Core by completing the mapping between DOM and the XML Information Set [XML Information Set], including the support for XML Base [XML Base], adding the ability to attach user information to DOM Nodes or to bootstrap a DOM implementation, providing mechanisms to resolve namespace prefixes or to manipulate "ID" attributes, giving to type information, etc.
This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of current W3C publications and the latest revision of this technical report can be found in the W3C technical reports index at http://www.w3.org/TR/.
This document contains the Document Object Model Level 3 Core specification and is a Proposed Recommendation. It has been produced as part of the W3C DOM Activity. The authors of this document are the DOM Working Group members. For more information about DOM, readers can also refer to DOM FAQ and DOM Conformance Test Suites.
It is based on the feedback received during the Candidate Recommendation period. An implementation report is available.
W3C Advisory Committee Representatives are now invited to submit their formal review via Web form, as described in the Call for Review. Additional comments may be sent to a Team-only list, dom-review@w3.org. The public is invited to send comments to the public mailing list www-dom@w3.org (public archive). The review period ends on 5 March 2004.
Publication as a Proposed Recommendation does not imply endorsement by the W3C Membership. This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress.
Patent disclosures relevant to this specification may be found on the Working Group's patent disclosure page.
Copyright © 2004 World Wide Web Consortium, (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, European Research Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics, Keio University). All Rights Reserved.
This document is published under the W3C® Document Copyright Notice and License. The bindings within this document are published under the W3C® Software Copyright Notice and License. The software license requires "Notice of any changes or modifications to the W3C files, including the date changes were made." Consequently, modified versions of the DOM bindings must document that they do not conform to the W3C standard; in the case of the IDL definitions, the pragma prefix can no longer be 'w3c.org'; in the case of the Java language binding, the package names can no longer be in the 'org.w3c' package.
Note: This section is a copy of the W3C® Document Notice and License and could be found at http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-documents-20021231.
Copyright © 2004 World Wide Web Consortium, (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, European Research Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics, Keio University). All Rights Reserved.
http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-documents-20021231
Public documents on the W3C site are provided by the copyright holders under the following license. By using and/or copying this document, or the W3C document from which this statement is linked, you (the licensee) agree that you have read, understood, and will comply with the following terms and conditions:
Permission to copy, and distribute the contents of this document, or the W3C document from which this statement is linked, in any medium for any purpose and without fee or royalty is hereby granted, provided that you include the following on ALL copies of the document, or portions thereof, that you use:
When space permits, inclusion of the full text of this NOTICE should be provided. We request that authorship attribution be provided in any software, documents, or other items or products that you create pursuant to the implementation of the contents of this document, or any portion thereof.
No right to create modifications or derivatives of W3C documents is granted pursuant to this license. However, if additional requirements (documented in the Copyright FAQ) are satisfied, the right to create modifications or derivatives is sometimes granted by the W3C to individuals complying with those requirements.
THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED "AS IS," AND COPYRIGHT HOLDERS MAKE NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, OR TITLE; THAT THE CONTENTS OF THE DOCUMENT ARE SUITABLE FOR ANY PURPOSE; NOR THAT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SUCH CONTENTS WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY THIRD PARTY PATENTS, COPYRIGHTS, TRADEMARKS OR OTHER RIGHTS.
COPYRIGHT HOLDERS WILL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF ANY USE OF THE DOCUMENT OR THE PERFORMANCE OR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONTENTS THEREOF.
The name and trademarks of copyright holders may NOT be used in advertising or publicity pertaining to this document or its contents without specific, written prior permission. Title to copyright in this document will at all times remain with copyright holders.
Note: This section is a copy of the W3C® Software Copyright Notice and License and could be found at http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-software-20021231
Copyright © 2004 World Wide Web Consortium, (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, European Research Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics, Keio University). All Rights Reserved.
http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-software-20021231
This work (and included software, documentation such as READMEs, or other related items) is being provided by the copyright holders under the following license. By obtaining, using and/or copying this work, you (the licensee) agree that you have read, understood, and will comply with the following terms and conditions.
Permission to copy, modify, and distribute this software and its documentation, with or without modification, for any purpose and without fee or royalty is hereby granted, provided that you include the following on ALL copies of the software and documentation or portions thereof, including modifications:
THIS SOFTWARE AND DOCUMENTATION IS PROVIDED "AS IS," AND COPYRIGHT HOLDERS MAKE NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR THAT THE USE OF THE SOFTWARE OR DOCUMENTATION WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY THIRD PARTY PATENTS, COPYRIGHTS, TRADEMARKS OR OTHER RIGHTS.
COPYRIGHT HOLDERS WILL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF ANY USE OF THE SOFTWARE OR DOCUMENTATION.
The name and trademarks of copyright holders may NOT be used in advertising or publicity pertaining to the software without specific, written prior permission. Title to copyright in this software and any associated documentation will at all times remain with copyright holders.
Note: This section is a copy of the W3C® Short Software Notice and could be found at http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-software-short-notice-20021231
Copyright © 2004 World Wide Web Consortium, (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, European Research Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics, Keio University). All Rights Reserved.
Copyright © [$date-of-software] World Wide Web Consortium, (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, European Research Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics, Keio University). All Rights Reserved. This work is distributed under the W3C® Software License [1] in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
[1] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-software-20021231
The Document Object Model (DOM) is an application programming interface (API) for valid HTML and well-formed XML documents. It defines the logical structure of documents and the way a document is accessed and manipulated. In the DOM specification, the term "document" is used in the broad sense - increasingly, XML is being used as a way of representing many different kinds of information that may be stored in diverse systems, and much of this would traditionally be seen as data rather than as documents. Nevertheless, XML presents this data as documents, and the DOM may be used to manage this data.
With the Document Object Model, programmers can build documents, navigate their structure, and add, modify, or delete elements and content. Anything found in an HTML or XML document can be accessed, changed, deleted, or added using the Document Object Model, with a few exceptions - in particular, the DOM interfaces for the XML internal and external subsets have not yet been specified.
As a W3C specification, one important objective for the Document Object Model is to provide a standard programming interface that can be used in a wide variety of environments and applications. The DOM is designed to be used with any programming language. In order to provide a precise, language-independent specification of the DOM interfaces, we have chosen to define the specifications in Object Management Group (OMG) IDL [OMG IDL], as defined in the CORBA 2.3.1 specification [CORBA]. In addition to the OMG IDL specification, we provide language bindings for Java [Java] and ECMAScript [ECMAScript] (an industry-standard scripting language based on JavaScript [JavaScript] and JScript [JScript]). Because of language binding restrictions, a mapping has to be applied between the OMG IDL and the programming language in used. For example, while the DOM uses IDL attributes in the definition of interfaces, Java does not allow interfaces to contain attributes:
// example 1: removing the first child of an element using ECMAScript mySecondTrElement.removeChild(mySecondTrElement.firstChild); // example 2: removing the first child of an element using Java mySecondTrElement.removeChild(mySecondTrElement.getFirstChild());
Note: OMG IDL is used only as a language-independent and implementation-neutral way to specify interfaces. Various other IDLs could have been used ([COM], [Java IDL], [MIDL], ...). In general, IDLs are designed for specific computing environments. The Document Object Model can be implemented in any computing environment, and does not require the object binding runtimes generally associated with such IDLs.
The DOM is a programming API for documents. It is based on an object structure that closely resembles the structure of the documents it models. For instance, consider this table, taken from an XHTML document:
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Shady Grove</td>
<td>Aeolian</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Over the River, Charlie</td>
<td>Dorian</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
A graphical representation of the DOM of the example table, with whitespaces in element content (often abusively called "ignorable whitespace") removed, is:
Figure: graphical representation of the DOM of the example table [SVG 1.0 version]
An example of DOM manipulation using ECMAScript would be:
// access the tbody element from the table element var myTbodyElement = myTableElement.firstChild; // access its second tr element // The list of children starts at 0 (and not 1). var mySecondTrElement = myTbodyElement.childNodes[1]; // remove its first td element mySecondTrElement.removeChild(mySecondTrElement.firstChild); // change the text content of the remaining td element mySecondTrElement.firstChild.firstChild.data = "Peter";
In the DOM, documents have a logical structure which is very much like a tree; to be more precise, which is like a "forest" or "grove", which can contain more than one tree. Each document contains zero or one doctype nodes, one document element node, and zero or more comments or processing instructions; the document element serves as the root of the element tree for the document. However, the DOM does not specify that documents must be implemented as a tree or a grove, nor does it specify how the relationships among objects be implemented. The DOM is a logical model that may be implemented in any convenient manner. In this specification, we use the term structure model to describe the tree-like representation of a document. We also use the term "tree" when referring to the arrangement of those information items which can be reached by using "tree-walking" methods; (this does not include attributes). One important property of DOM structure models is structural isomorphism: if any two Document Object Model implementations are used to create a representation of the same document, they will create the same structure model, in accordance with the XML Information Set [XML Information Set].
Note: There may be some variations depending on the parser being used to build the DOM. For instance, the DOM may not contain white spaces in element content if the parser discards them.
The name "Document Object Model" was chosen because it is an "object model" in the traditional object oriented design sense: documents are modeled using objects, and the model encompasses not only the structure of a document, but also the behavior of a document and the objects of which it is composed. In other words, the nodes in the above diagram do not represent a data structure, they represent objects, which have functions and identity. As an object model, the DOM identifies:
The structure of SGML documents has traditionally been represented by an abstract data model, not by an object model. In an abstract data model, the model is centered around the data. In object oriented programming languages, the data itself is encapsulated in objects that hide the data, protecting it from direct external manipulation. The functions associated with these objects determine how the objects may be manipulated, and they are part of the object model.
This section is designed to give a more precise understanding of the DOM by distinguishing it from other systems that may seem to be like it.
The DOM originated as a specification to allow JavaScript scripts and Java programs to be portable among Web browsers. "Dynamic HTML" was the immediate ancestor of the Document Object Model, and it was originally thought of largely in terms of browsers. However, when the DOM Working Group was formed at W3C, it was also joined by vendors in other domains, including HTML or XML editors and document repositories. Several of these vendors had worked with SGML before XML was developed; as a result, the DOM has been influenced by SGML Groves and the HyTime standard. Some of these vendors had also developed their own object models for documents in order to provide an API for SGML/XML editors or document repositories, and these object models have also influenced the DOM.
In the fundamental DOM interfaces, there are no objects representing entities. Numeric character references, and references to the pre-defined entities in HTML and XML, are replaced by the single character that makes up the entity's replacement. For example, in:
<p>This is a dog & a cat</p>
the "&" will be replaced by the character "&", and the text in the P element will form a single continuous sequence of characters. Since numeric character references and pre-defined entities are not recognized as such in CDATA sections, or in the SCRIPT and STYLE elements in HTML, they are not replaced by the single character they appear to refer to. If the example above were enclosed in a CDATA section, the "&" would not be replaced by "&"; neither would the <p> be recognized as a start tag. The representation of general entities, both internal and external, are defined within the extended (XML) interfaces of Document Object Model Core.
Note: When a DOM representation of a document is serialized as XML or HTML text, applications will need to check each character in text data to see if it needs to be escaped using a numeric or pre-defined entity. Failing to do so could result in invalid HTML or XML. Also, implementations should be aware of the fact that serialization into a character encoding ("charset") that does not fully cover ISO 10646 may fail if there are characters in markup or CDATA sections that are not present in the encoding.
The DOM specifications provide a set of APIs that forms the DOM API. Each DOM specification defines one or more modules and each module is associated with one feature name. For example, the DOM Core specification (this specification) defines two modules:
The following representation contains all DOM modules, represented using their feature names, defined along the DOM specifications:
Figure: A view of the DOM Architecture [SVG 1.0 version]
A DOM implementation can then implement one (i.e. only the Core module) or more modules depending on the host application. A Web user agent is very likely to implement the "MouseEvents" module, while a server-side application will have no use of this module and will probably not implement it.
This section explains the different levels of conformance to DOM Level 3. DOM Level 3 consists of 16 modules. It is possible to conform to DOM Level 3, or to a DOM Level 3 module.
An implementation is DOM Level 3 conformant if it supports the Core module defined in this document (see Fundamental Interfaces: Core module). An implementation conforms to a DOM Level 3 module if it supports all the interfaces for that module and the associated semantics.
Here is the complete list of DOM Level 3.0 modules and the features used by them. Feature names are case-insensitive.
A DOM implementation must not return true to the
DOMImplementation.hasFeature(feature,
version) method of the
DOMImplementation
interface for that feature unless the implementation conforms to
that module. The version number for all features used
in DOM Level 3.0 is "3.0".
The DOM specifies interfaces which may be used to manage XML or HTML documents. It is important to realize that these interfaces are an abstraction - much like "abstract base classes" in C++, they are a means of specifying a way to access and manipulate an application's internal representation of a document. Interfaces do not imply a particular concrete implementation. Each DOM application is free to maintain documents in any convenient representation, as long as the interfaces shown in this specification are supported. Some DOM implementations will be existing programs that use the DOM interfaces to access software written long before the DOM specification existed. Therefore, the DOM is designed to avoid implementation dependencies; in particular,
The Level 2 interfaces were extended to provide both Level 2 and Level 3 functionality.
DOM implementations in languages other than Java or ECMAScript may choose bindings that are appropriate and natural for their language and run time environment. For example, some systems may need to create a Document3 class which inherits from a Document class and contains the new methods and attributes.
DOM Level 3 does not specify multithreading mechanisms.
This specification defines a set of objects and
interfaces for accessing and manipulating document objects. The
functionality specified (the Core functionality) is
sufficient to allow software developers and Web script authors to
access and manipulate parsed HTML [HTML
4.01] and XML [XML 1.0] content inside conforming
products. The DOM Core API also
allows creation and population of a Document object using only DOM
API calls. A solution for loading a Document and saving it
persistently is proposed in [DOM Level 3 Load and Save].
The DOM presents documents as a hierarchy of Node objects that also
implement other, more specialized interfaces. Some types of nodes
may have child nodes of various
types, and others are leaf nodes that cannot have anything below
them in the document structure. For XML and HTML, the node types,
and which node types they may have as children, are as follows:
Document --
Element (maximum of
one), ProcessingInstruction,
Comment, DocumentType (maximum of
one)DocumentFragment
-- Element, ProcessingInstruction,
Comment, Text, CDATASection, EntityReferenceDocumentType --
no childrenEntityReference --
Element, ProcessingInstruction,
Comment, Text, CDATASection, EntityReferenceElement --
Element, Text, Comment, ProcessingInstruction,
CDATASection,
EntityReferenceAttr -- Text, EntityReferenceProcessingInstruction -- no
childrenComment -- no
childrenText -- no
childrenCDATASection --
no childrenEntity -- Element, ProcessingInstruction,
Comment, Text, CDATASection, EntityReferenceNotation -- no
childrenThe DOM also specifies a NodeList interface to handle
ordered lists of Nodes, such as the children
of a Node, or the
elements returned by the
Element.getElementsByTagNameNS(namespaceURI,
localName) method, and also a NamedNodeMap interface to
handle unordered sets of nodes referenced by their name attribute,
such as the attributes of an Element. NodeList and NamedNodeMap objects in the
DOM are live; that is, changes to the underlying document
structure are reflected in all relevant NodeList and NamedNodeMap
objects. For example, if a DOM user gets a NodeList object containing
the children of an Element, then subsequently
adds more children to that element (or removes children, or
modifies them), those changes are automatically reflected in the
NodeList, without further
action on the user's part. Likewise, changes to a Node in the tree are
reflected in all references to that Node in NodeList and NamedNodeMap
objects.
Finally, the interfaces Text, Comment, and CDATASection all inherit from
the CharacterData
interface.
Most of the APIs defined by this specification are
interfaces rather than classes. That means that an
implementation need only expose methods with the defined names and
specified operation, not implement classes that correspond directly
to the interfaces. This allows the DOM APIs to be implemented as a
thin veneer on top of legacy applications with their own data
structures, or on top of newer applications with different class
hierarchies. This also means that ordinary constructors (in the
Java or C++ sense) cannot be used to create DOM objects, since the
underlying objects to be constructed may have little relationship
to the DOM interfaces. The conventional solution to this in
object-oriented design is to define factory methods that
create instances of objects that implement the various interfaces.
Objects implementing some interface "X" are created by a
"createX()" method on the Document interface; this is
because all DOM objects live in the context of a specific
Document.
The Core DOM APIs are designed to be compatible with a wide range of languages, including both general-user scripting languages and the more challenging languages used mostly by professional programmers. Thus, the DOM APIs need to operate across a variety of memory management philosophies, from language bindings that do not expose memory management to the user at all, through those (notably Java) that provide explicit constructors but provide an automatic garbage collection mechanism to automatically reclaim unused memory, to those (especially C/C++) that generally require the programmer to explicitly allocate object memory, track where it is used, and explicitly free it for re-use. To ensure a consistent API across these platforms, the DOM does not address memory management issues at all, but instead leaves these for the implementation. Neither of the explicit language bindings defined by the DOM API (for ECMAScript and Java) require any memory management methods, but DOM bindings for other languages (especially C or C++) may require such support. These extensions will be the responsibility of those adapting the DOM API to a specific language, not the DOM Working Group.
While it would be nice to have attribute and method names that are short, informative, internally consistent, and familiar to users of similar APIs, the names also should not clash with the names in legacy APIs supported by DOM implementations. Furthermore, both OMG IDL [OMG IDL] and ECMAScript [ECMAScript] have significant limitations in their ability to disambiguate names from different namespaces that make it difficult to avoid naming conflicts with short, familiar names. So, DOM names tend to be long and descriptive in order to be unique across all environments.
The Working Group has also attempted to be internally consistent in its use of various terms, even though these may not be common distinctions in other APIs. For example, the DOM API uses the method name "remove" when the method changes the structural model, and the method name "delete" when the method gets rid of something inside the structure model. The thing that is deleted is not returned. The thing that is removed may be returned, when it makes sense to return it.
The DOM Core APIs present two
somewhat different sets of interfaces to an XML/HTML document: one
presenting an "object oriented" approach with a hierarchy of
inheritance, and a
"simplified" view that allows all manipulation to be done via the
Node interface
without requiring casts (in Java and other C-like languages) or
query interface calls in COM
environments. These operations are fairly expensive in Java and
COM, and the DOM may be used in performance-critical environments,
so we allow significant functionality using just the Node
interface. Because many other users will find the inheritance hierarchy easier to
understand than the "everything is a Node" approach to the DOM,
we also support the full higher-level interfaces for those who
prefer a more object-oriented API.
In practice, this means that there is a certain amount of
redundancy in the API. The Working
Group considers the "inheritance" approach the primary
view of the API, and the full set of functionality on Node to be "extra"
functionality that users may employ, but that does not eliminate
the need for methods on other interfaces that an object-oriented
analysis would dictate. (Of course, when the O-O analysis yields an
attribute or method that is identical to one on the Node
interface, we don't specify a completely redundant one.) Thus, even
though there is a generic Node.nodeName attribute on the
Node
interface, there is still a Element.tagName attribute on
the Element
interface; these two attributes must contain the same value, but
the it is worthwhile to support both, given the different
constituencies the DOM API must
satisfy.
To ensure interoperability, this specification specifies the following basic types used in various DOM modules. Even though the DOM uses the basic types in the interfaces, bindings may use different types and normative bindings are only given for Java and ECMAScript in this specification.
DOMString typeThe DOMString type is
used to store [Unicode] characters as a sequence
of 16-bit units using UTF-16
as defined in [Unicode] and Amendment 1 of
[ISO/IEC 10646].
Characters are fully normalized as defined in appendix B of [XML 1.1] if:
true while loading the document or the
document was certified as defined in [XML
1.1];true while using the method Document.normalizeDocument(),
or while using the method Node.normalize();Note that, with the exceptions of Document.normalizeDocument()
and Node.normalize(),
manipulating characters using DOM methods does not guarantee to
preserve a fully-normalized text.
A DOMString is a
sequence of 16-bit
units.
valuetype DOMString sequence<unsigned short>;
The UTF-16 encoding was chosen because of its widespread
industry practice. Note that for both HTML and XML, the document
character set (and therefore the notation of numeric character
references) is based on UCS [ISO/IEC 10646]. A single
numeric character reference in a source document may therefore in
some cases correspond to two 16-bit units in a DOMString (a high surrogate and
a low surrogate). For issues related to string comparisons, refer
to String comparisons in the
DOM.
For Java and ECMAScript, DOMString is bound to the
String type because both languages also use UTF-16 as
their encoding.
Note: As of August 2000, the OMG IDL specification
([OMG
IDL]) included a wstring type. However,
that definition did not meet the interoperability criteria of the
DOM API since it relied on
negotiation to decide the width and encoding of a character.
DOMTimeStamp typeThe DOMTimeStamp
type is used to store an absolute or relative time.
A DOMTimeStamp
represents a number of milliseconds.
typedef unsigned long long DOMTimeStamp;
For Java, DOMTimeStamp is bound to the
long type. For ECMAScript, DOMTimeStamp is bound to the
Date type because the range of the
integer type is too small.
DOMUserData typeThe DOMUserData
type is used to store application data.
A DOMUserData
represents a reference to application data.
typedef any DOMUserData;
For Java, DOMUserData is bound to the
Object type. For ECMAScript, DOMUserData is bound to
any type.
The DOM has many interfaces that imply string matching. For XML,
string comparisons are case-sensitive and performed with a binary
comparison of the
16-bit units of the DOMStrings. However, for
case-insensitive markup languages, such as HTML 4.01 or earlier,
these comparisons are case-insensitive where appropriate.
Note that HTML processors often perform specific case normalizations (canonicalization) of the markup before the DOM structures are built. This is typically using uppercase for element names and lowercase for attribute names. For this reason, applications should also compare element and attribute names returned by the DOM implementation in a case-insensitive manner.
The character normalization, i.e. transforming into their
fully
normalized form as as defined in [XML 1.1], is
assumed to happen at serialization time. The DOM Level 3 Load and
Save module [DOM Level 3 Load and Save] provides
a serialization mechanism (see the DOMSerializer
interface, section 2.3.1) and uses the DOMConfiguration
parameters "normalize-characters"
and "check-character-normalization"
to assure that text is fully
normalized [XML 1.1]. Other serialization
mechanisms built on top of the DOM Level 3 Core also have to assure
that text is fully normalized.
The DOM specification relies on DOMString values as resource
identifiers, such that the following conditions are met:
The term "absolute URI" refers to a complete resource identifier and the term "relative URI" refers to an incomplete resource identifier.
Within the DOM specifications, these identifiers are called URIs, "Uniform Resource Identifiers", but this is meant abstractly. The DOM implementation does not necessarily process its URIs according to the URI specification [IETF RFC 2396]. Generally the particular form of these identifiers must be ignored.
When is not possible to completely ignore the type of a DOM URI, either because a relative identifier must be made absolute or because content must be retrieved, the DOM implementation must at least support identifier types appropriate to the content being processed. [HTML 4.01], [XML 1.0], and associated namespace specification [XML Namespaces] rely on [IETF RFC 2396] to determine permissible characters and resolving relative URIs. Other specifications such as namespaces in XML 1.1 [XML Namespaces 1.1] may rely on alternative resource identifier types that may, for example, include non-ASCII characters, necessitating support for alternative resource identifier types where required by applicable specifications.
DOM Level 2 and 3 support XML namespaces [XML
Namespaces] by augmenting several interfaces of the DOM
Level 1 Core to allow creating and manipulating elements and attributes associated to a
namespace. When [XML 1.1] is in use (see Document.xmlVersion),
DOM Level 3 also supports [XML Namespaces 1.1].
As far as the DOM is concerned, special attributes used for declaring XML namespaces are still exposed and can be manipulated just like any other attribute. However, nodes are permanently bound to namespace URIs as they get created. Consequently, moving a node within a document, using the DOM, in no case results in a change of its namespace prefix or namespace URI. Similarly, creating a node with a namespace prefix and namespace URI, or changing the namespace prefix of a node, does not result in any addition, removal, or modification of any special attributes for declaring the appropriate XML namespaces. Namespace validation is not enforced; the DOM application is responsible. In particular, since the mapping between prefixes and namespace URIs is not enforced, in general, the resulting document cannot be serialized naively. For example, applications may have to declare every namespace in use when serializing a document.
In general, the DOM implementation (and higher) doesn't perform
any URI normalization or canonicalization. The URIs given to the
DOM are assumed to be valid (e.g., characters such as white spaces
are properly escaped), and no lexical checking is performed.
Absolute URI references are treated as strings and compared literally. How relative
namespace URI references are treated is undefined. To ensure
interoperability only absolute namespace URI references (i.e., URI
references beginning with a scheme name and a colon) should be
used. Applications should use the value null as the
namespaceURI parameter for methods if they wish to
have no namespace. In programming languages where empty strings can
be differentiated from null, empty strings, when given as a
namespace URI, are converted to null. This is true
even though the DOM does no lexical checking of URIs.
Note: Element.setAttributeNS(null,
...) puts the attribute in the per-element-type
partitions as defined in XML
Namespace Partitions in [XML Namespaces].
Note: In the DOM, all namespace declaration attributes are by definition bound to the namespace URI: "http://www.w3.org/2000/xmlns/". These are the attributes whose namespace prefix or qualified name is "xmlns" as introduced in [XML Namespaces 1.1].
In a document with no namespaces, the child list of an EntityReference node is always
the same as that of the corresponding Entity. This is not true in a
document where an entity contains unbound namespace prefixes. In such a
case, the descendants of the
corresponding EntityReference nodes may be
bound to different namespace
URIs, depending on where the entity references are. Also,
because, in the DOM, nodes always remain bound to the same
namespace URI, moving such EntityReference nodes can lead
to documents that cannot be serialized. This is also true when the
DOM Level 1 method Document.createEntityReference(name)
is used to create entity references that correspond to such
entities, since the descendants of the returned EntityReference
are unbound. While DOM Level 3 does have support for the resolution
of namespace prefixes, use of such entities and entity references
should be avoided or used with extreme care.
The "NS" methods, such as Document.createElementNS(namespaceURI,
qualifiedName) and Document.createAttributeNS(namespaceURI,
qualifiedName), are meant to be used by namespace aware
applications. Simple applications that do not use namespaces can
use the DOM Level 1 methods, such as Document.createElement(tagName)
and Document.createAttribute(name).
Elements and attributes created in this way do not have any
namespace prefix, namespace URI, or local name.
Note: DOM Level 1 methods are namespace ignorant.
Therefore, while it is safe to use these methods when not dealing
with namespaces, using them and the new ones at the same time
should be avoided. DOM Level 1 methods solely identify attribute
nodes by their Node.nodeName. On the contrary,
the DOM Level 2 methods related to namespaces, identify attribute
nodes by their Node.namespaceURI and
Node.localName.
Because of this fundamental difference, mixing both sets of methods
can lead to unpredictable results. In particular, using Element.setAttributeNS(namespaceURI,
qualifiedName, value), an element may have two attributes (or
more) that have the same Node.nodeName, but different
Node.namespaceURIs. Calling
Element.getAttribute(name)
with that nodeName could then return any of those
attributes. The result depends on the implementation. Similarly,
using Element.setAttributeNode(newAttr),
one can set two attributes (or more) that have different Node.nodeNames
but the same Node.prefix and Node.namespaceURI. In this
case Element.getAttributeNodeNS(namespaceURI,
localName) will return either attribute, in an
implementation dependent manner. The only guarantee in such cases
is that all methods that access a named item by its
nodeName will access the same item, and all methods
which access a node by its URI and local name will access the same
node. For instance, Element.setAttribute(name,
value) and Element.setAttributeNS(namespaceURI,
qualifiedName, value) affect the node that Element.getAttribute(name) and
Element.getAttributeNS(namespaceURI,
localName), respectively, return.
The DOM Level 3 adds support for the [base URI] property
defined in [XML Information Set] by providing
a new attribute on the Node interface that exposes
this information. However, unlike the Node.namespaceURI attribute,
the Node.baseURI
attribute is not a static piece of information that every node
carries. Instead, it is a value that is dynamically computed
according to [XML Base]. This means its value
depends on the location of the node in the tree and moving the node
from one place to another in the tree may affect its value. Other
changes, such as adding or changing an xml:base
attribute on the node being queried or one of its ancestors may
also affect its value.
One consequence of this it that when external entity references
are expanded while building a Document one may need to add,
or change, an xml:base attribute to the Element nodes originally
contained in the entity being expanded so that the Node.baseURI returns the
correct value. In the case of ProcessingInstruction nodes
originally contained in the entity being expanded the information
is lost. [DOM Level 3 Load and Save] handles
elements as described here and generates a warning in the latter
case.
As new XML vocabularies are developed, those defining the vocabularies are also beginning to define specialized APIs for manipulating XML instances of those vocabularies. This is usually done by extending the DOM to provide interfaces and methods that perform operations frequently needed by their users. For example, the MathML [MathML 2.0] and SVG [SVG 1.1] specifications have developed DOM extensions to allow users to manipulate instances of these vocabularies using semantics appropriate to images and mathematics, respectively, as well as the generic DOM XML semantics. Instances of SVG or MathML are often embedded in XML documents conforming to a different schema such as XHTML.
While the Namespaces in XML specification [XML Namespaces] provides a mechanism for integrating these documents at the syntax level, it has become clear that the DOM Level 2 Recommendation [DOM Level 2 Core] is not rich enough to cover all the issues that have been encountered in having these different DOM implementations be used together in a single application. DOM Level 3 deals with the requirements brought about by embedding fragments written according to a specific markup language (the embedded component) in a document where the rest of the markup is not written according to that specific markup language (the host document). It does not deal with fragments embedded by reference or linking.
A DOM implementation supporting DOM Level 3 Core should be able to collaborate with subcomponents implementing specific DOMs to assemble a compound document that can be traversed and manipulated via DOM interfaces as if it were a seamless whole.
The normal typecast operation on an object should support the
interfaces expected by legacy code for a given document type.
Typecasting techniques may not be adequate for selecting between
multiple DOM specializations of an object which were combined at
run time, because they may not all be part of the same object as
defined by the binding's object model. Conflicts are most obvious
with the Document
object, since it is shared as owner by the rest of the document. In
a homogeneous document, elements rely on the Document for
specialized services and construction of specialized nodes. In a
heterogeneous document, elements from different modules expect
different services and APIs from the same Document object, since there
can only be one owner and root of the document hierarchy.
Each DOM module defines one or more features, as listed in the
conformance section (Conformance). Features are
case-insensitive and are also defined for a specific set of
versions. For example, this specification defines the features
"Core" and "XML", for the version
"3.0". Versions "1.0" and
"2.0" can also be used for features defined in the
corresponding DOM Levels. To avoid possible conflicts, as a
convention, names referring to features defined outside the DOM
specification should be made unique. Applications could then
request for features to be supported by a DOM implementation using
the methods DOMImplementationSource.getDOMImplementation(features)
or DOMImplementationSource.getDOMImplementationList(features),
check the features supported by a DOM implementation using the
method DOMImplementation.hasFeature(feature,
version), or by a specific node using Node.isSupported(feature,
version). Note that when using the methods that take a
feature and a version as parameters, applications can use
null or empty string for the version parameter if they
don't wish to specify a particular version for the specified
feature.
Up to the DOM Level 2 modules, all interfaces, that were an
extension of existing ones, were accessible using binding-specific
casting mechanisms if the feature associated to the extension was
supported. For example, an instance of the EventTarget
interface could be obtained from an instance of the Node interface if the
feature "Events" was supported by the node.
As discussed Mixed DOM
implementations, DOM Level 3 Core should be able to collaborate
with subcomponents implementing specific DOMs. For that effect, the
methods DOMImplementation.getFeature(feature,
version) and Node.getFeature(feature,
version) were introduced. In the case of DOMImplementation.hasFeature(feature,
version) and Node.isSupported(feature,
version), if a plus sign "+" is prepended to any feature
name, implementations are considered in which the specified feature
may not be directly castable but would require discovery through
DOMImplementation.getFeature(feature,
version) and Node.getFeature(feature,
version). Without a plus, only features whose interfaces
are directly castable are considered.
// example 1, without prepending the "+"
if (myNode.isSupported("Events", "3.0")) {
EventTarget evt = (EventTarget) myNode;
// ...
}
// example 2, with the "+"
if (myNode.isSupported("+Events", "3.0")) {
// (the plus sign "+" is irrelevant for the getFeature method itself
// and is ignored by this method anyway)
EventTarget evt = (EventTarget) myNode.getFeature("Events", "3.0");
// ...
}
Because previous versions of the DOM specification only defined a set of interfaces, applications had to rely on some implementation dependent code to start from. However, hard-coding the application to a specific implementation prevents the application from running on other implementations and from using the most-suitable implementation of the environment. At the same time, implementations may also need to load modules or perform other setup to efficiently adapt to different and sometimes mutually-exclusive feature sets.
To solve these problems this specification introduces a
DOMImplementationRegistry object with a function that
lets an application find implementations, based on the specific
features it requires. How this object is found and what it exactly
looks like is not defined here, because this cannot be done in a
language-independent manner. Instead, each language binding defines
its own way of doing this. See Java Language Binding and ECMAScript Language Binding
for specifics.
In all cases, though, the DOMImplementationRegistry
provides a getDOMImplementation method accepting a
features string, which is passed to every known DOMImplementationSource
until a suitable DOMImplementation is found
and returned. The DOMImplementationRegistry also
provides a getDOMImplementationList method accepting a
features string, which is passed to every known DOMImplementationSource,
and returns a list of suitable DOMImplementations. Those two
methods are the same as the ones found on the DOMImplementationSource
interface.
Any number of DOMImplementationSource
objects can be registered. A source may return one or more DOMImplementation singletons
or construct new DOMImplementation objects,
depending upon whether the requested features require specialized
state in the DOMImplementation object.
The interfaces within this section are considered fundamental, and must be fully implemented by all conforming implementations of the DOM, including all HTML DOM implementations [DOM Level 2 HTML], unless otherwise specified.
A DOM application may use the DOMImplementation.hasFeature(feature,
version) method with parameter values "Core" and "3.0"
(respectively) to determine whether or not this module is supported
by the implementation. Any implementation that conforms to DOM
Level 3 or a DOM Level 3 module must conform to the Core module.
Please refer to additional information about
conformance in this specification. The DOM Level 3
Core module is backward compatible with the DOM Level 2 Core
[DOM Level 2 Core] module, i.e. a
DOM Level 3 Core implementation who returns true for
"Core" with the version number "3.0" must
also return true for this feature when
the version number is "2.0",
"" or, null.
DOM operations only raise exceptions in "exceptional"
circumstances, i.e., when an operation is impossible to perform
(either for logical reasons, because data is lost, or because the
implementation has become unstable). In general, DOM methods return
specific error values in ordinary processing situations, such as
out-of-bound errors when using NodeList.
Implementations should raise other exceptions under other
circumstances. For example, implementations should raise an
implementation-dependent exception if a null argument
is passed when null was not expected.
Some languages and object systems do not support the concept of exceptions. For such systems, error conditions may be indicated using native error reporting mechanisms. For some bindings, for example, methods may return error codes similar to those listed in the corresponding method descriptions.
exception DOMException { unsigned short code; }; // ExceptionCode const unsigned short INDEX_SIZE_ERR = 1; const unsigned short DOMSTRING_SIZE_ERR = 2; const unsigned short HIERARCHY_REQUEST_ERR = 3; const unsigned short WRONG_DOCUMENT_ERR = 4; const unsigned short INVALID_CHARACTER_ERR = 5; const unsigned short NO_DATA_ALLOWED_ERR = 6; const unsigned short NO_MODIFICATION_ALLOWED_ERR = 7; const unsigned short NOT_FOUND_ERR = 8; const unsigned short NOT_SUPPORTED_ERR = 9; const unsigned short INUSE_ATTRIBUTE_ERR = 10; // Introduced in DOM Level 2: const unsigned short INVALID_STATE_ERR = 11; // Introduced in DOM Level 2: const unsigned short SYNTAX_ERR = 12; // Introduced in DOM Level 2: const unsigned short INVALID_MODIFICATION_ERR = 13; // Introduced in DOM Level 2: const unsigned short NAMESPACE_ERR = 14; // Introduced in DOM Level 2: const unsigned short INVALID_ACCESS_ERR = 15; // Introduced in DOM Level 3: const unsigned short VALIDATION_ERR = 16; // Introduced in DOM Level 3: const unsigned short TYPE_MISMATCH_ERR = 17;
An integer indicating the type of error generated.
Note: Other numeric codes are reserved for W3C for possible future use.
DOMSTRING_SIZE_ERRDOMString.HIERARCHY_REQUEST_ERRNode is
inserted somewhere it doesn't belong.INDEX_SIZE_ERRINUSE_ATTRIBUTE_ERRINVALID_ACCESS_ERR, introduced in
DOM Level 2.INVALID_CHARACTER_ERRINVALID_MODIFICATION_ERR, introduced in
DOM Level 2.INVALID_STATE_ERR, introduced in
DOM Level 2.NAMESPACE_ERR, introduced in DOM Level 2.NOT_FOUND_ERRNode in a context where it
does not exist.NOT_SUPPORTED_ERRNO_DATA_ALLOWED_ERRNode which does not support
data.NO_MODIFICATION_ALLOWED_ERRSYNTAX_ERR, introduced in DOM Level 2.TYPE_MISMATCH_ERR, introduced in
DOM Level 3.VALIDATION_ERR, introduced in DOM Level 3.insertBefore or
removeChild would make the Node invalid with respect to
"partial validity", this
exception would be raised and the operation would not be done. This
code is used in [DOM Level 3 Validation]. Refer to
this specification for further information.WRONG_DOCUMENT_ERRNode is
used in a different document than the one that created it (that
doesn't support it).The DOMStringList interface provides the
abstraction of an ordered collection of DOMString values, without
defining or constraining how this collection is implemented. The
items in the DOMStringList are accessible via an
integral index, starting from 0.
// Introduced in DOM Level 3: interface DOMStringList { DOMString item(in unsigned long index); readonly attribute unsigned long length; boolean contains(in DOMString str); };
containsDOMStringList.
str of type DOMString|
|
|
itemindexth item in the
collection. If index is greater than or equal to the
number of DOMStrings in
the list, this returns null.
index of type
unsigned longThe NameList interface provides the abstraction of
an ordered collection of parallel pairs of name and namespace
values (which could be null values), without defining or
constraining how this collection is implemented. The items in the
NameList are accessible via an integral index,
starting from 0.
// Introduced in DOM Level 3: interface NameList { DOMString getName(in unsigned long index); DOMString getNamespaceURI(in unsigned long index); readonly attribute unsigned long length; boolean contains(in DOMString str); boolean containsNS(in DOMString namespaceURI, in DOMString name); };
length of type unsigned
long, readonlylength-1
inclusive.containsNameList.
str of type DOMString|
|
|
containsNSgetNameindexth name item in
the collection.
index of type
unsigned long|
The name at the |
getNamespaceURIindexth namespaceURI
item in the collection.
index of type
unsigned long|
The namespace URI at the |
The DOMImplementationList interface provides the
abstraction of an ordered collection of DOM implementations,
without defining or constraining how this collection is
implemented. The items in the DOMImplementationList
are accessible via an integral index, starting from 0.
// Introduced in DOM Level 3: interface DOMImplementationList { DOMImplementation item(in unsigned long index); readonly attribute unsigned long length; };
length of type
unsigned long, readonlyDOMImplementations in the
list. The range of valid child node indices is 0 to
length-1 inclusive.itemindexth item in the
collection. If index is greater than or equal to the
number of DOMImplementations in the
list, this returns null.
index of type
unsigned long|
The |
This interface permits a DOM implementer to supply one or more
implementations, based upon requested features and versions, as
specified in DOM Features. Each
implemented DOMImplementationSource object is listed
in the binding-specific list of available sources so that its
DOMImplementation
objects are made available.
// Introduced in DOM Level 3: interface DOMImplementationSource { DOMImplementation getDOMImplementation(in DOMString features); DOMImplementationList getDOMImplementationList(in DOMString features); };
getDOMImplementationfeatures of type DOMStringgetDOMImplementationList."XML 3.0 Traversal +Events
2.0" will request a DOM implementation that supports the
module "XML" for its 3.0 version, a module that support of the
"Traversal" module for any version, and the module "Events" for its
2.0 version. The module "Events" must be accessible using the
method Node.getFeature() and
DOMImplementation.getFeature().