Yes but it isn't clear how to share code between the client and server -- especially in the case the original poster mentioned: org.w3c.dom.* We were forced to wrap all the org.w3c.dom interfaces in classes that implement the com.google.gwt.client.xml interfaces.
I understand that GWT can't implement some parts of org.w3c.dom.* (e.g. namespaces) but rather than introduce a new interface I would rather have had errors in those cases. The truly best situation would be if the org.w3c.dom interfaces were defined as extending the com.google.gwt.client.xml interfaces. But I don't see how that could be done. On Nov 12, 9:29 am, Thomas Broyer <[email protected]> wrote: > Which API do you find "so much different" from the native one? I don't > think com.google.gwt.dom.client.* can be less different that the API it's > making available to the GWT Java world. Same for com.google.gwt.canvas, > com.google.gwt.geolocation, com.google.gwt.media, com.google.gwt.regexp, > com.google.gwt.storage, and com.google.gwt.xhr. > Event handling has to be different for various reasons (prevent memory > leaks being one of > them:http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/wiki/DomEventsAndMemoryLeaks > ) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
