W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > July to September 1998

FW: To wstring or not to wstring...

From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@eps.inso.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 14:31:39 -0700
To: "DOM List" <www-dom@w3.org>
Message-ID: <002901bda9ee$a0611730$577670c6@endymion.eps.inso.com>
A message I meant to send to the entire list... 

-----Original Message-----
From: anoq@vip.cybercity.dk [mailto:anoq@vip.cybercity.dk] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 1998 11:13 AM
To: gtn
Subject: Re: To wstring or not to wstring...


Gavin Thomas Nicol wrote:
> For the purposes of the DOM, you should consider a wstring to be
> a
> 
>    typedef sequence<unsigned short> wstring
> 
> and I think we even said this in one version of the spec.

OK, I have seen this... I just thought it was temporary, because
your compiler / whatever didn't have wstrings yet (omniORB doesn't
either...)

> I was planning
> to have this automatically generated in the IDL binding (which I am in
> the process of cleaning up so that omniORB will handle the DOM IDL
> correctly). Perhaps we should define this as DOMString instead?

At least not wstring, since this is a reserved IDL word...

Should this also go to the DOM-list? :)


Cheers
-- 
,
ANOQ of the Sun / Johnny Andersen

E-Mail:   anoq@vip.cybercity.dk or anoq@berlin-consortium.org
Homepage: http://users.cybercity.dk/~ccc25861/
Received on Tuesday, 7 July 1998 14:31:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:13:45 GMT