Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> Just a thought: why not take a leaf out of the DOM's book and write the > canonical version of the SAX interfaces in a language-neutral format like > IDL? That way, bindings to a number of languages (including, but not > limited to, C++ and Java) can be trivially derived by using the > appropriate IDL-to-whatever converter. Shh! That's unwelcome talk around here. I advocated using IDL for the official SAX definition a while back, but no-one seemed to deem it worth considering. Of course, we've fallen into exactly the sort of trap that language-specific interface definition causes: people translating to another language all do it differently, and the whole set of discussions must reiterate for language Y. The Python/XML group recently hashed out details of of a Python/DOM binding. Because there is a developed Python/CORBA binding, we knew exactly how to model several key components of the interface. Note that this does not involve taking up _any_ of CORBA's baggage except for interface definition, for which IDL does a brilliant job. -- Uche Ogbuji FourThought LLC, IT Consultants uche.ogbuji@f... (970)481-0805 Software engineering, project management, Intranets and Extranets http://FourThought.com http://OpenTechnology.org xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; unsubscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
