Re: [boost] RFC: Boost.XML API prototype in the sandbox

From: Michael Caisse (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-07-10 02:15:06

Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> Right. The "DOM" API isn't actually standardized for anything but Java.
> So in my attempt to provide a "DOM-like" API I have been trying to capture
> the semantics, not the syntax, and map that to "modern C++ style" idioms.
>
>   
<-------- snip ---------->

Stefan -

I am interested in reviewing your work. I have written wrappers of
the Xerces DOM and SAX to make it more C++ friendly to my needs. I
think a Boost reviewed library will be beneficial to the community. 

I hope this doesn't sound pedantic but the DOM is a well defined API
using OMG-IDL. The interface is standardized. The W3C has only described
language bindings for Java and Javascript; however, the DOM API has
well defined levels of conformance that are language independent.

Perhaps a different *name* than DOM would be useful. I had similar issues
with my API because users had an expectation from the term DOM that
included a defined API. Maybe something like XMLDoc or XOM (sorry, Mr. Namespace
is not available right now).

I personally think the DOM is annoying to use and I look forward
to studying your library.

Best regards -

Michael

-- 
----------------------------------
Michael Caisse
Object Modeling Designs
www.objectmodelingdesigns.com