Ken Kozman wrote:
>
> >
> > We have long intended to convert these DOM objects to use xpidl
> > and xpconnect. This is expected to be a big code savings and will
> > pave the way to supporting DOM scripting in content from
> > languages other than JavaScript (e.g Python and Perl). We put
> > this off for a long time while all were busily working on other
> > stuff, but we are starting in on working out the details now and
> > developing a plan.
> >
> > John.
>
> I was hoping that XPCOM had some sort of cross platform DOM implementation
> (similar to the MSXML component on Windows.) But I guess this is not really
> the case? Or, more specifically, it is the case, but due to the way the DOM
> interfaces are designed you can not access them from Python or other non C++
> languages (except JavaScript which is handled as a special case...)?
Correct.
> This is
> a total bummer. Is there anything I can do to help this along? This is
> something we were hoping to use on our current project.
>
> The main reason we want to use the DOM is to load/save and operate on XML
> files as our main configuration format. Are their other XPIDL supported
> interfaces for operating on XML data (preferably ones which abide by the
> DOM) in XPCOM?
I am working on changes to xpconnect to add support for
everything needed to be able to do the backwards-compatible DOM
without the generated JS specific code. [EMAIL PROTECTED] is
working on the DOM end of things for this - including moving the
current interfaces to xpidl. It won't be done for a while, but we
are definitely doing it. Perhaps jst could use some help?
You might ask on the mozilla DOM or XML newsgroups about what
XML/DOM interfaces are already supported. I don't really know.
John.
>
> Ken.
