Sciter for D

[Dejan Lekic]

On Tuesday, 26 May 2026 at 19:34:08 UTC, c-smile wrote:
>
> One more urban legend, sigh ...
>

When i said DOM I should have said DOM in the sense of what we 
typically mean when we use this term - browser DOM. So no, it is 
not urban legend, it is the truth.

Sciter, it seems to me, implements only ~30-40% of the DOM/CSS 
specification - just what application UIs actually need - while 
browsers must support the full spec plus legacy quirks, security 
sandboxing, mutation observers, live collections, DevTools hooks, 
and a separate accessibility tree for arbitrary untrusted web 
content.

Browsers also maintain separate DOM → Layout → Paint → 
Compositing trees with pointers between them, while Sciter uses a 
more integrated design with fewer indirections.

Simply put, Sciter is built to run *our* (Sciter users) trusted 
application UI efficiently, while browsers are built to run *any* 
untrusted website safely and completely - that difference alone 
accounts for the 5-8x node size reduction you are so proud of.

Perhaps in the future conversation we should refer to Sciter-DOM 
when we talk about Sciter specifically, as you can't 
realistically claim Sciter follows the DOM/CSS specification "to 
the letter".

I do like Sciter! Just let's not spread BS here and let's be 
realistic.