Yep, I was thinking about this too - I think you're right that we need something soon (and basing it on an XML technology that's already available is the right way to do this) and then an SDO API later (probably wrappering the C++ implementation, in a similar way to the PHP SDO package).
As there was some talk about implementing implementation.python in the Java codebase, another piece that we probably need is an SCA client & implementation for Python spec, along the lines of the other C&I specs at http://www.osoa.org/display/Main/Service+Component+Architecture+Specifications - I guess we'll need to talk to the spec people about this. Do you think this is a good idea? What about specs for Ruby, Javascript, etc..? Cheers Andy On 9/22/06, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To allow Python components to handle more than just simple data types, we need to decide how we present structured data / complex types to Python components. We'll probably want to support many more data binding options in the future, but we need one simple solution as a starting point. For Ruby I have implemented support for Rexml for now mainly because it's included in the Ruby distribution. What do you guys think we should use for Python? - an xml.dom or xml.minidom - from the Python standard library - an xml.ElementTree - more pythonic and nicer rendering, recent addition to the Python 2.5 standard library (just released on Sept 19th), available as a separate package on older releases - a new implementation of a Python transcription of the SDO API? Here's what I was thinking about: - step 1, soon - ElementTree - step 2, longer term - an SDO API Any thoughts? -- Jean-Sebastien --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
