RE: ISSUE-10: [API] Should we be using well known types from other domains, such as DOMString?

[Moving to public list]

Agreed. Perhaps you should add a list of the mappings as a separate wiki
page.

---R

-----Original Message-----
From: member-ddwg-request@w3.org [mailto:member-ddwg-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Rodrigo Garcia Acevedo
Sent: 13 June 2007 14:50
To: Mobile Web Initiative Device Description Working Group WG
Subject: RE: ISSUE-10: [API] Should we be using well known types from
other domains, such as DOMString?


Hi.

The DOMString type used in other specs was created to represent UTF-16
strings because IDL strings are only ISO 8859-1. As there can be values
that need UTF encoding I think the DOMString type is needed and should
be reused.
Anyway, as I already stated previously [1] the mapping from IDL to other
languages has issues that have to be resolved.

Regards,
Rodrigo.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ddwg/2007Feb/0023.html

-----Mensaje original-----
De: member-ddwg-request@w3.org [mailto:member-ddwg-request@w3.org] En
nombre de Mobile Web Initiative Device Description Working Group Issue
Tracker
Enviado el: martes, 12 de junio de 2007 10:58
Para: member-ddwg@w3.org
Asunto: ISSUE-10: [API] Should we be using well known types from other
domains, such as DOMString?



ISSUE-10: [API] Should we be using well known types from other domains,
such as DOMString?

http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/DDWG/Group/track/issues/10

Raised by: Jose Manuel Cantera Fonseca
On product: 

In other W3C IDL-based specs such as the DOM (see [1]) there are some
wll-known datatypes that are used. Should these already defined
datatypes and its corresponding bindings being reused by the DDR API? 

[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/DDWG/wiki/IdlAndW3c

Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2007 15:06:41 UTC