xml-dev - RE: The DOM and the victim, the iconoclast and the believer

["Didier PH Martin" <martind@netfolder.com>]

Hi David,

After checking twice I discovered that you probably meant (again it may
depend for each IDL to C++ mapping.

Node.get_OwnerDocument().get_Implementation().hasFeature()

Sorry, I was checking for getimplementation but it is more "Implementation"
which is mapped on several IDL to C++ as "get_Implementation()".

So you are right David, DOM level 1 got the capability for level or feature
support probing. However, everything that I said about the impedance
mismatch in the case of early binding about the Mozilla XPCOM, the WINE and
Microsoft DCOM, remains true. Because the node interface changed, the C++
client will simply get a system error also more commonly called an
application crash. So, the solution to have a non-changing interface to
probe the provider capabilities remains, or that W3C declare that XPCOM and
DCOM are heretics that only deserved to be excommunicated from the Web dev
community :-)))


Cheers
Didier PH Martin
----------------------------------------------
Email: martind@netfolder.com
Conferences: Web New York (http://www.mfweb.com)
Book to come soon: XML Pro published by Wrox Press
Products: http://www.netfolder.com


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ or CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
Please note: New list subscriptions now closed in preparation for transfer to OASIS.