[XML-SIG] Re: [DO-SIG] Python language bidning January 2000 Draft

Dieter Maurer dieter@handshake.de
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.
I disagree.

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)".