Another try on groves

[Ken MacLeod]

Francis Norton <francis at redrice.com> writes:

> Now that I have some feeling for the rationale behind Groves, I'd be
> very interested in knowing what this might mean for implementations.
> 
> Could one come up with a language independent API like the DOM, to
> which Grove compliant APIs would conform? Presumably there is more
> complexity in that the DOM has a closed set of underlying object
> types whereas each Grove interface would would have different
> underlying object types. In Java terms, would this be an interface
> (a totally abstract class which guarantees a core functionality in
> any object which implements it)? Has anyone in fact built CORBA IDL
> or a Java interface defining the Grove API, or am I coming in at the
> wrong level?

I'd like to believe you're coming in at the wrong level.  Many
languages have built-in syntax to access ``members of objects'' or
``fields of records'' that can often be applied to accessing
``properties of nodes''.  In this case, the grove API is the
language's native syntax.

Where native syntax is not applicable, groves most closely resemble
container classes (dictionaries, mappings, hash tables; lists, arrays,
sequences).  Again, a language's standard container class interface or
protocol can be used.

-- 
  Ken MacLeod
  ken at bitsko.slc.ut.us

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