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: http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: (dsssl) Re: The Future of DSSSL, Didier PH Martin | Thread | RE: (dsssl) Re: The Future of DSSSL, David Santamauro |
Re: (dsssl) RE: The Future of DSSSL, Jean-Marie Kubek | Date | Re: (dsssl) RE: The Future of DSSSL, Sebastian Rahtz |
Month |