Adding capabilities to javascript from the ActiveX scripting engine.

[pantagruel]

I was wondering if anyone has enough familiarity with the ActiveX
scripting implementation of javascript to answer if it would be
possible to define a new language for the engine, and for the
implementation inheriting from the javascript implementation, adding in
capabilities.

By capabilities I mean not just the generic use of the word, but more
specifically the concept of capability-based security.
Hoping someone can give me a good answer on this as I don't want to end
up doing a lot of investigation just to discover the answer is a big no
way in hell.

Thanks.

[Jim Davis]

Re: Adding capabilities to javascript from the ActiveX scripting engine.

"pantagruel " <bry@itnisk.com > wrote in message
news:1125238876 .808081.13350@g 14g2000cwa.goog legroups.com...[color=blue]
>I was wondering if anyone has enough familiarity with the ActiveX
> scripting implementation of javascript to answer if it would be
> possible to define a new language for the engine, and for the
> implementation inheriting from the javascript implementation, adding in
> capabilities.[/color]

I'm not at all sure what you're talking about... what ActiveX scripting
implementation? Who's the vendor?

If it's Micrsoft then I'm confident that the implementation would be the
same as the related JScript implementation. They wouldn't do multiple
versions from scratch - if they did create an ActiveX control (and I can't
really see any reason for them to) which "did" JavaScript I think the smart
money would be on it being the same as the version in IE.

Jim Davis

[pantagruel]

Re: Adding capabilities to javascript from the ActiveX scripting engine.

ActiveX Scripting has sometimes been used to refer to Active Scripting,
that is however an outmoded usage, I should probably have specified.

http://www.microsoft.com/mind/0297/activescripting.asp

so to clarify, what I am thinking of is an implementation that takes
the javascript implementation and adds extra functionality to it.
Extending objects at the Active Script level as opposed in a script
itself.

[RobG]

Re: Adding capabilities to javascript from the ActiveX scriptingengine .

pantagruel wrote:[color=blue]
> ActiveX Scripting has sometimes been used to refer to Active Scripting,
> that is however an outmoded usage, I should probably have specified.[/color]

The terms are interchangeable - the "X" seems to have been dropped about
2000. Why is open to conjecture.
[color=blue]
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/mind/0297/activescripting.asp
>
> so to clarify, what I am thinking of is an implementation that takes
> the javascript implementation and adds extra functionality to it.
> Extending objects at the Active Script level as opposed in a script
> itself.
>[/color]

Do you mean extending the COM object to add extra functionality that can
be accessed by custom extensions to the language? According to the
referenced article, that is exactly what Active Scripting was supposed
to avoid. It suggests that you choose the script language that suits
and then use the appropriate COM object.

Presumably this is for an IE and Windows only intranet, so if you're
looking for a COM object to embed in IE (or any Windows scripting host),
why not use JScript - Microsoft has already added many extensions beyond
ECMAScript and the W3C DOM, including embedding your own COM objects.

Or you could use VB Script - choose your poison.


--
Rob

[pantagruel]

Re: Adding capabilities to javascript from the ActiveX scripting engine.

because I want a javascript with capability-based security.

there are various implementations I could think about adding this too,
but for various reasons demos would be pretty cool if it were the
Active Scripting version. I was of the opinion that it was not doable,
and everything I've seen so far indicates that it isn't