Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: David Brownell <email@example.com>
- To: Lars Marius Garshol <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 14:24:30 -0800
Lars Marius Garshol wrote:
> * uche ogbuji
> | Furthermore, I've been thinking of proposing that the SAX2
> | interfaces be specified in IDL rather than Java (or at least
> | publishing an IDL translatiuon when the interfaces are stabilized),
> | and your proposal wouldn't wash in IDL.
> Many things in SAX won't wash in IDL, such as the use of the
> Java-specific InputStream, Reader and Locale objects.
> Also, IDL has a problem in that it's sort of a least common
> denominator, and thus leaves out many useful language-specific things.
> So you'd probably want to do a manual translation anyway.
> If there ever is a published SAX spec I think it should use IDL to be
> politically correct and point out potential language-mapping problems.
> However, the actual utility of IDL I think is low in this particular
When we defined IDL at the OMG, we acknowledged that there was scope
for language-specific binding attributes for a bunch of specific
things. That didn't argue against using IDL for the majority of
methods, where such language-specific issues don't crop up.
There's no crime in writing, as the OMG did, specs that are IDL but
where particular data types are defined as being language-specific,
and not subject to the general mapping rules. In CORBA 1.0 and 2.0
we called that "Pseudo-IDL".
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)