[XML-SIG] Re: [DO-SIG] Python language bidning January 2000 Draft
Tue, 27 Jun 2000 20:47:31 +0200 (CEST)
Greg Stein writes:
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2000 at 08:38:49AM -0700, Paul Prescod wrote:
> > So let's design for the market we know we have (Python programmers who
> > want an easy API) and not the market that I don't think we have (people
> > who want to use Python DOMs from other languages and other language DOMs
> > from Python). Interoperability among Python DOMs is enough. Bridges to
> > Java and Microsoft COM DOMs would also be useful (and easy to write).
> Well said!
> I "violently agree" :-) with this position. Who the heck is going to expect
> their Python code to be compiled by a C++ compiler? The code simply is not
> going to port.
Of cause, the same code will not work in Python and C++.
However, when I look at the DOM recommendation, I see
an IDL interface specification. I strongly favor that
the Python DOM API is composed of this official standard
document and an (official) IDL->Python mapping.
All arguments, we give here for use of attributes or
accessor function without leading '_', hold also for
other IDL mappings.
Thus, maybe change the IDL->Python mapping, but please keep
the "Python-API = IDL->Python-Mapping(IDL-Spec)".