Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Len Bullard <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: David Durand <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 11:53:43 -0600
David Durand wrote:
> I see XML-groves and XML-API as parallel and needing to be in synch. I
> don't see either as having to depend on the other, though, and frankly,
> given the relative penetration of groves and Java into the "global
> developer consciousness", I don't see groves as that high a priority.
If relative penetration is important, spec it in COBOL or C.
This kind of argument went on in VRML and was wisely rejected.
The commitment to a CORBA IDL is a commitment to a syntax for the spec
and not a lot else. The commitment to JAVA for implementation
is only a commitment to a slow language. The commitment to it
in the spec is a commitment to SUN. That should never be
a part of the spec. It should be something the spec can
be bound to. It will anyway, but XML's future is in many
languages and platforms.
Groves, as Richard Light pointed out, at the very least
gives us authoritative names for things. As Joe English
and Gavin Nicol have pointed out, the bindings here are
trivial. If that is the case, then groves-IDL-Whatever(Java, C++, etc)
is the right thing to do. Let all implementors decide
what they want to penetrate and with which device.
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To unsubscribe, send to firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (email@example.com)