[Accessibility] PROPOSAL: Accessible Document

[Bill Haneman]

Harald Fernengel wrote:

>On Wednesday 27 April 2005 17:54, Bill Haneman wrote:
>  
>
>>On the GNOME platform it includes powerful performance enhancements
>>which offer more than an order of magnitude over standard CORBA wire
>>transport, so it aggressively tackles performance considerations as
>>well.  It is also a highly extensible API.
>>    
>>
>
>I thought the consensus was that CORBA is the necessary evil we chose because 
>there is already an implementation. Even with all the "powerful performance 
>enhancement" CORBA is still a magnitute slower than most other IPC 
>mechanisms.
>  
>
I don't believe this is true.  It's certainly _slower_ than xmlrpc 
(which I don't recommend), and I am not aware of any other IPC 
mechanisms which are both cross-platform, object-oriented/extensible, 
network-transparent, and which outperform CORBA.

>I'm currently fighting hard to sell our product managers the idea that we have 
>to support a technology which most other vendors abandoned and most of our 
>programmers don't understand even with training (provided they manage to 
>install it successfully).
>  
>
I think this is a very unfair characterization - and an inaccurate one 
("...most other vendors abandoned"). 

>Sorry if that sounded a bit harsh but I think that pro-only CORBA messages are 
>a bit counter-productive.
>  
>
I have yet to see an alternative that meets all our needs.  I agree that 
one is desirable, perhaps DBUS will someday be that alternative.

- Bill

>Harald
>
>_______________________________________________
>Accessibility mailing list
>Accessibility at mail.freestandards.org
>http://mail.freestandards.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility
>  
>