- From: <keshlam@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 12:33:16 -0400
- To: "Michael Champion" <mike.champion@softwareag-usa.com>
- cc: www-dom@w3.org, michael.goulish@softwareag-usa.com, eric.bratton@softwareag-usa.com
Good question. I'd like to see a good answer, but this may be nontrivial... >I don't think this has happened ... has it? My perception is that it hasn't... and that we may have missed our best window. The ad-hoc bindings may disagree on some fairly basic things. Memory management, mapping of DOMString to a concrete type, how exceptions are handled in languages which don't have native support, how objects are handled in non-OO languages... all of these have multiple reasonable solutions, each with their own advantages and disadvantages. >"first mover" situtation where the first to publish sets the de-facto standard? I believe C++ has several published bindings with no agreement on what the standard is... and without a shared interface layer to ease interoperability. A layer of implementation-independent bindings _would_ be a good thing,if it can be done; the problem is convincing folks to adopt it given the behavioral variations noted above. >are there any published DOM COM bindings other than Microsoft's I believe someone was working on COM bindings for Xerces. I don't know their status. ______________________________________ Joe Kesselman / IBM Research
Received on Friday, 25 August 2000 12:35:52 UTC