xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Eric Hodges <harmo...@swbell.net>
Subject RE: Question about document type nodes and JAXP
Date Wed, 18 Oct 2000 19:32:11 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arnaud Le Hors [mailto:lehors@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 2:25 PM
> To: general@xml.apache.org
> Cc: xerces-dev@xml.apache.org; xerces-j-dev@xml.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Question about document type nodes and JAXP
>
>
> Eric Hodges wrote:
> >
> > I'm not convinced that a language neutral spec is that
> important.  What does
> > it give us?  I'd rather use an API tailored to the language I'm
> in, I think.
>
> But that was one of the requirements the DOM WG had to work with. People
> want to implement and use the DOM in many different languages. And they
> do. There exist EcmaScript, Java and C++ implementations, but also C,
> Delphi, Python, Perl ones, etc...
> Also companies typically don't want their employees to have to learn a
> different API everytime they switch from one language to another.

I think the cost of learning a different API is pretty small compared to the
costs imposed by forcing all the APIs to be similar.  I don't have a problem
with a spec that is language neutral as long as it is robust enough (i.e.
has classes and factories) that popular languages aren't unnecessarily
restricted in their implementation of the spec.

IDL defines interfaces.  C doesn't have interfaces.  I assume the implement
them through a naming scheme for the methods?  If that's allowed, then I
don't see a problem with a spec that can define classes and factories.



Mime
View raw message