Re: (dsssl) Re: The Future of DSSSL

Subject: Re: (dsssl) Re: The Future of DSSSL
From: Jean-Marie Kubek <kubek@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 03 Jan 2002 11:35:55 +0000
"Didier PH Martin" <martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> I'll try to get the other notes and them as well on the site. Obviously,
> OpenJade may benefit the most from a separation of the groove engine from
> the DSSSL engine. 

>                   Since OpenJade is implemented in C++, XPCOM is a good
> candidate. This would imply some modification to the actual classes
> inheritance. So instead of inheriting from the groove class we would instead
> use a separate XPCOM groove engine. 

DCOP (From KDE) could be another. Why not use just use CORBA directly?
There are some good public ORB (TAO, MICO, Orbit) and idl mappings
exists for others languages than C++ (C, python, Ada, Java).

>                                     This would allow, to have DSSSL to sit
> on top of different engine either with permanence or transient grooves.
> Actually, the Openjade's implementation is based on a transient groove.

I read that some japanese group submitted a maintenance document to
the dsssl standard. This document seems to contain some API to the
DSSSL processor. But I was unable to find this text on the web, any
pointer here?

> cheers
> Didier PH Martin.
Happy new year,
        Jean-Marie Kubek
        Comp. Center
        INSA Toulouse

 DSSSList info and archive:

Current Thread