[Fwd: C and other non "standard" DOM language bindings]

attached mail follows:

That's fine with us.   As Mike stated, there are no proprietary dependencies
in the APIs that were published; the only problem that had to be solved was
coming up with different  API names, e.g., for the parse functions, to avoid
multiply defined symbols, a problem that doesn't exist with OO languages.

How do we go about submitting it for quasi-standard status?

Thx,
Ben

Michael Champion wrote:

> The DOM working group early on decided to only "officially" support
> ECMAScript and Java language bindings for the API. The idea at the time was
> to encourage people who developed DOM bindings for Perl, C++,C, Python, etc.
> to submit them as W3C Notes that the DOM spec could link to, if not
> officially endorse, thus encouraging a certain amount of standardization in
> the other language bindings.
>
> I don't think this has happened ... has it?  Is there some way of promoting
> interoperability for DOM applications written in languages other than Java
> and ECMAScript that I'm not aware of, or is more of a "first mover"
> situtation where the first to publish sets the de-facto standard?  For
> example, are there any published DOM COM bindings other than Microsoft's,
> and do other implementations (Netscape used COM at one point) interoperate
> with MS's?
>
> Getting to my main  point ... I'm wondering about C language bindings for
> the DOM.  I know that Oracle has published one ... and the XML C Library for
> Gnome is DOM-like, but not really an attempt to be a complete,
> vendor-neutral C DOM binding as far as I can tell.  Are there any others?
> Assuming that Oracle's is the most complete, devoid of proprietary
> dependencies (I don't see any ...)  and DOM-like, have you folks considering
> submitting it as a W3C Note to give it some quasi-standard status?    Or if
> not, is anyone interested in collaborating on some sort of effort to adapt
> the DOM (Level 2, I guess) API to C in an open, portable manner and do
> whatever we can do to get it publicized as the quasi-official DOM C binding?
>
> I'd be very happy to simply accept Oracle's API here (or Gnome's, if it
> really is a complete DOM binding that doesn't depend on other Gnome stuff),
> but it would be nice to somehow wrap it in the mantle of the W3C in order to
> encourage people to stick with a common binding rather than having everyone
> roll their own.
>
> Thoughts or suggestions, anyone?
>
> Mike Champion