SAX/C++ vs. SAX2

uche.ogbuji at uche.ogbuji at
Mon Dec 6 15:10:42 GMT 1999

> Just a thought: why not take a leaf out of the DOM's book and write the
> canonical version of the SAX interfaces in a language-neutral format like
> IDL? That way, bindings to a number of languages (including, but not
> limited to, C++ and Java) can be trivially derived by using the
> appropriate IDL-to-whatever converter.

Shh!  That's unwelcome talk around here.

I advocated using IDL for the official SAX definition a while back, but no-one 
seemed to deem it worth considering.  Of course, we've fallen into exactly the 
sort of trap that language-specific interface definition causes: people 
translating to another language all do it differently, and the whole set of 
discussions must reiterate for language Y.

The Python/XML group recently hashed out details of of a Python/DOM binding.  
Because there is a developed Python/CORBA binding, we knew exactly how to 
model several key components of the interface.  Note that this does not 
involve taking up _any_ of CORBA's baggage except for interface definition, 
for which IDL does a brilliant job.

Uche Ogbuji
FourThought LLC, IT Consultants
uche.ogbuji at	(970)481-0805
Software engineering, project management, Intranets and Extranets

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at
Archived as: and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list