Re: [OT] CORBA/IIOP & IDL was: W3C issue: Time to standardize the XML library for C/C++
Dietmar Kuehl wrote:
[color=blue]
> Steven T. Hatton wrote:[color=green]
>> Do you know how to translate the w3c DOM IDL Definitions into C++ header
>> files?[/color]
>
> Actually, I don't think that W3C specifies language bindings for their
> IDL stuff. I'm also not sure whether they refer to OMG's IDL and its
> binding although I seem to recall that they state that this binding is
> an option but not required.[/color]
I'm pretty sure they are testing conformance against their Java and
ECMAScript (JavaScript) binding specifications. These are almost identical
to the IDL abstract binding.
[color=blue]
> Personally, I would use a rather different
> interpretation of the DOM standard than the implementations eg. in
> Xerces. It is a while since I looked more closely into this stuff.[/color]
This is a list of 3rd party recommendations for DOM bindings. Apache's
Xerces is the only one addressing all three levels. I believe it's a
question of how closely the implementations come to resembling the IDL.
The ECMAScript and Java bindings use slightly different naming conventions,
but they are mappable to the IDL.
[color=blue]
> I haven't
> seen another person by that name in the C++ community.[/color]
That must mean you are also this person:
"First, I d like to thank Dietmar K¨uhl. Dietmar is an expert on C++,
especially on input/output streams and internationaliz ation (he implemented
an I/O stream library just for fun). He not only translated major parts of
this book from German to English, he also wrote sections of this book using
his expertise. In addition, he provided me with invaluable feedback over
the years."
I'm impressed. :-)
--
STH
Hatton's Law: "There is only One inviolable Law"
KDevelop: http://www.kdevelop.org SuSE: http://www.suse.com
Mozilla: http://www.mozilla.org
Dietmar Kuehl wrote:
[color=blue]
> Steven T. Hatton wrote:[color=green]
>> Do you know how to translate the w3c DOM IDL Definitions into C++ header
>> files?[/color]
>
> Actually, I don't think that W3C specifies language bindings for their
> IDL stuff. I'm also not sure whether they refer to OMG's IDL and its
> binding although I seem to recall that they state that this binding is
> an option but not required.[/color]
I'm pretty sure they are testing conformance against their Java and
ECMAScript (JavaScript) binding specifications. These are almost identical
to the IDL abstract binding.
[color=blue]
> Personally, I would use a rather different
> interpretation of the DOM standard than the implementations eg. in
> Xerces. It is a while since I looked more closely into this stuff.[/color]
This is a list of 3rd party recommendations for DOM bindings. Apache's
Xerces is the only one addressing all three levels. I believe it's a
question of how closely the implementations come to resembling the IDL.
The ECMAScript and Java bindings use slightly different naming conventions,
but they are mappable to the IDL.
[color=blue]
> I haven't
> seen another person by that name in the C++ community.[/color]
That must mean you are also this person:
"First, I d like to thank Dietmar K¨uhl. Dietmar is an expert on C++,
especially on input/output streams and internationaliz ation (he implemented
an I/O stream library just for fun). He not only translated major parts of
this book from German to English, he also wrote sections of this book using
his expertise. In addition, he provided me with invaluable feedback over
the years."
I'm impressed. :-)
--
STH
Hatton's Law: "There is only One inviolable Law"
KDevelop: http://www.kdevelop.org SuSE: http://www.suse.com
Mozilla: http://www.mozilla.org
Comment