RE: IDL?

Jonathan Robie (jwrobie@mindspring.com)
Mon, 29 Dec 1997 11:17:49 -0500

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Wendell Piez: "Still quizzing Microsoft on minimization"
Previous message: Jonathan Robie: "RE: IDL?"
In reply to: Matthew Gertner: "Re: IDL?"
Next in thread: Matthew Gertner: "Re: IDL?"

At 01:46 PM 12/28/97, Peter Murray-Rust wrote:
>At 07:42 27/12/97 -0500, David Megginson wrote:

>>In other words, a DOM builder would be just another an event-based
>>SAX-J application.

>This suggests that implementers of the DOM (or other tree-related
>interfaces) will build on top of SAX-J. IFF you/we can persuade them of
>this, then great. If not, then there might be a tendency for SAX-J to
>atrophy after the DOM.

There will always be applications that prefer an event-based API, and they
may never want to or need to convert to a tree view. It would be nice to
have a standardized event-based API in addition to the standardized
tree-based API that the DOM provides...

Jonathan

jonathan@texcel.no
Texcel Research
http://www.texcel.no

Next message: Wendell Piez: "Still quizzing Microsoft on minimization"
Previous message: Jonathan Robie: "RE: IDL?"
In reply to: Matthew Gertner: "Re: IDL?"
Next in thread: Matthew Gertner: "Re: IDL?"