[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [cgmo-webcgm] Required changes to IDL
Not an implementer but I think option 1 is the best one.
Regards,
Franck DULUC
Technical Data Research Manager
Customer Services - SDND
AIRBUS France
Phone: +33 (0)5 61 18 19 16
Fax: +33 (0)5 61 93 59 44
mailto:franck.duluc@airbus.com
Address:
BP D0611, 316, route de Bayonne
31060 TOULOUSE Cedex, FRANCE
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Benoit Bezaire [mailto:benoit@itedo.com]
Envoyé : lundi 23 août 2004 23:15
À : CGM Open WebCGM TC
Cc : Ralf Berger
Objet : [cgmo-webcgm] Required changes to IDL
Hi all,
I'm trying to generate a single complete IDL document (webcgm.idl).
This exercise raises a few questions... The IDL was obviously based
on the W3C DOM and W3C SVG IDLs but we have some inconsistencies to
resolve...
We have the same definition as the W3C DOM Level 3 for DOMString and
NodeList; but quite a number of differences for several
interfaces such as Node, Attr, DOMStringList, Event etc...
I'm wondering what to do about that? I don't think it's a good idea
for us to have a Node interface that is different from the W3C DOM
Node interface while using the same name. I think the group will get
criticized for that.
I believe we have three options:
1) removing the name confusion by prefixing all datatypes and
interfaces with "WebCGM"? (ie; WebCGMString, WebCGMNode etc...)
2) using DOM interfaces.
3) ignoring the problem.
My vote goes for 1) for the following reasons:
- option 2 is unfortunately not really an option since we have
demonstrated that the exact DOM approach is inappropriate for
WebCGM.
- ignoring the problem may be a possibility but creating a
dependency on the W3C DOM by 'using' some of their datatypes and
interfaces may be risky in the long run.
- prefixing all datatypes and interfaces with "WebCGM" requires
little effort from vendors in this early stage of development and in
my opinion reduces confusion regarding the relationship of our DOM
and other W3C DOM specifications.
Comments on these changes would be appreciated. Note: the complete
IDL document (with the above changes) is attached to this email.
--
Benoit mailto:benoit@itedo.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]