Hi Thomas,
I am most intrigued by your statement on the "rightness" of doing away with IDL.
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000 23:56:04 Thomas Beale wrote:
...
>I have to admit, .net has a couple of things right - they've ditched IDL - the
>meta-model is embedded in the MSIL file, and they (finally) have sane version
>control (cf COM).
I thought IDL/CORBA is the most promising approach to have inter-operability between
health-related applications. It seems to me that an "interface definition language
(IDL)" would be required no matter what you call it (or how it is defined).
Are you saying that .Net does not have an IDL? Or are you saying that Microsoft's
IDL is better than OMG's IDL for open health applications? I am truly a beginner in
this area so please refer me to background reading materials if this is off-topic for
this list.
thanks in advance,
Andrew
---
Andrew P. Ho, M.D.
OIO: Open Infrastructure for Outcomes
www.TxOutcome.Org
Assistant Clinical Professor
Department of Psychiatry, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center
University of California, Los Angeles
Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail account at
http://www.eudoramail.com
